22694. Adulteration   and misbranding of   butter.    U.   S.   v.   Sugar   Creek
Creamery Co.    Flea of guilty.    Fine, $800 and costs.     (F. & D. no.
31477.    Sample nos. 30333-A, 40080-A.)
This case was based on two shipments of butter, one of which contained less 
than 80 percent by weight of milk fat, and the other of which was short weight.
On March 30, 1934, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the district 
court an information against the Sugar Creek Creamery Co., a corporation, 
trading at Danville, Ill., alleging shipment by said company on or about April 17, 
1933, from the State of Illinois into the District of Columbia, and on or about 
April 18, 1933, from the State of Illinois into the State of New York, of quan- 
tities of butter which was adulterated and misbranded in violation of the Food 
and Drugs Act as amended. The article was labeled in part: (Carton) " Sugar 
Creek Butter * * * Full Weight One Pound General Offices Danville, Ills.": 
(wrapper of portion) "One Pound Net Weight."
It was alleged in the information that one of the shipments of butter was 
adulterated in that a substance containing less than 80 percent by weight of 
milk fat had been substituted for butter, a product which must contain not less 
than 80 percent by weight of milk fat, as required by the act of Congress of 
March 4, 1923, which the article purported to be. 
>
Misbranding of the butter in the said shipment was alleged for the reason ' 
that the statement " Butter ", borne on the label, was false and misleading, and 
for the further reason that it was labeled so as to deceive and mislead the pur- 
chaser, since it was not butter as defined and required by law, in that it con- 
tained less than 80 percent by weight of milk fat. Misbranding of the remaining 
shipment was alleged for the reason that the statements " Full Weight One 
Pound ", borne on the carton, and the statement " One Pound Net Weight", 
borne on the wrapper, were false and misleading, since the said cartons and 
wrappers contained less than 1 pound of butter. Misbranding of this lot was 
alleged for the further reason that it was food in package form and the quantity 
of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the 
package, since the statement made was incorrect, some of the packages contain- 
ing not more than 15.41 ounces, and the average net weight for a large number 
of packages examined being not more than 15.78 ounces.
On June 25, 1934, a plea of guilty was entered on behalf of the defendant 
company, and the court imposed a fine of $800 and costs.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.