2252. Adulteration and misbranding of vinegar.    U. S. v. Robert H. Ball  (Ball
Products  Co.y.    Plea of guilty.    Fine, $20.     (F.' D.  C.  No.  4145.     Sample
No. 29233-E.) ' 
This product was adulterated and misbranded because' distilled vinegar or 
dilute acetic acid had been substituted for cider vinegar, which it purported 
to be. 
.     ;: '
On June 21, 1941, the United States; attorney for the Southern District oi 
Ohio filed an information against Robert H. Ball, trading as Ball Products Co 
at Dayton; Ohio, alleging shipment within the period from on or about November 
26 to\ December 11,1940, from the State of Ohio into the; State; of Kentucky of 
quantities of vinegar that was adulterated and niisbrajo.ded. It was labeled in 
part: "Ball Brand Cider" Vinegar,"_ '   ,
The article was alleged to be adulterated (1) in that distilled vinegar or dilute 
acetic acid had been substituted in whole and in part for cider vinegar, which 
it purported to be; and (2) in that distilled vinegar or dilute acetic acid had been 
mixed or packed therewith so as to reduce its quality and strength.    .
It was alleged to be misbranded in that'the statements "Superior. Quality 
* * * Cider Vinegar Reduced to 4% Acidity," borne on the bottle label, were 
false and misleading since it was not of superior quality and did not consist 
of cider vinegar reduced to 4 percent acidity, but did consist in whole and in 
part of distilled vinegar or dilute acetic acid. It was alleged to be misbranded 
further in that it was offered for sale under the name of another food, i. e., eider 
vinegar.
On June 28,1941, the defendant entered a piea of guilty and the court imposed 
a fine of $10 on each of the two counts of the information, totaling $20.