19719. Alleged  adulteration  and   Misbranding of  cottonseed  meal.    U.   S.
v. Kershaw Oil Mill. Tried to the court and jury. Verdict of not 
guilty.     (F. & D. No. 25705.    I. S. No. 016955.)
This action was based on the interstate shipment of a quantity of a product 
represented to be cottonseed meal, which was labeled as containing 36 per cent 
of protein. Samples taken from the shipment were found to contain less than 
36 per cent of protein.
On February 17, 1931, the United States attorney for the Western District 
of South Carolina, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed 
in the District Court of the United States for the district aforesaid an informa- 
tion against the Kershaw Oil Mill, a corporation, Kershaw, S. C, charging 
shipment by said company in violation of the food and drugs act, on or about 
January 1, 1930, from the State of South Carolina into the State of North 
Carolina, of a quantity of cottonseed meal that was alleged to be adulterated 
and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Tag) " ' Palmetto Brand * 
Good Cotton Seed Meal, Manufactured by Kershaw Oil Mill, Kershaw, South 
Carolina, Guaranteed Analysis Protein (Equiv. Ammonia 7 p. c.) 36.00 per 
cent."
It was alleged in the information that the article was adulterated in that a 
substance, cottonseed feed containing less than 36 per cent of protein, had been 
substituted for cottonseed meal containing 36 per cent of protein, the equivalent 
of 7 per cent of ammonia, which the article purported to be.
It was further alleged that the article was misbranded in that the statements, 
" Cotton Seed Meal * * * Guaranteed Analysis, Protein (Equiv. Ammonia 
7 p. c.) 36.00 per cent," borne on the tag, were false and misleading; for the 
further reason that it was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead 
the purchaser; and for the further reason that it was offered for sale under 
the distinctive name of another article, namely, cottonseed meal.
On March 9, 1932, the case came on for trial before the court and a jury. 
After the submission of evidence and argument by counsel, the court instructed 
the jury, which retired and after due deliberation returned a verdict of not 
guilty.
HENRY A.  WALLACE,  Secretary of Agriculture.