OFFICIAI, INSPECTIONS 72. IO5 



Other would obviously be as unfair to the manufacturer of 

 the latter as to himself^ To repeat, the only analysis that a 

 buyer can safely go by is thr. minimum {in the case of fiber, 

 maximum) guaranteed on the label of the feed he is buying. 

 Anything tending to make him think that he is likely to get 

 more than that is misleading. The object of the analyses 

 made under the law is to make it as sure as possible that he 

 will get that analysis. 



That the possibility of a man's being misled by the numeri- 

 cal results of analyses is not merely theoretical is shown by the 

 fact that one manufacturer of feed was apparently misled in 

 that very way last year. In the last "Official Inspections" re- 

 lating to feeding stuffs, two samples of a certain feed were 

 reported. The feed in question was at that time guaranteed to 

 carry 15 per cent protein. The two samples examined both 

 happened to be from cars that were above the average and 

 both tested nearly 17 per cent protein. Apparently on the 

 strength of those analyses, the manufacturer raised the protein 

 guaranty to 16.50 per cent. The result was that the goods of 

 that brand examined this season were all found considerably 

 below guaranty in protein and cases are now pending against 

 that manufacturer under the United States law for the inter- 

 state shipment of misbranded goods. Feeders would certainly 

 ,be fully as likely to be misled by such results as a manufacturer, 

 whose business it is to know about feeding stuffs. 



It should be constantly borne in mind that the guarantees 

 required by the law are not average, but in the case of protein 

 and fat, minimum, and in the case of fiber maximum percent- 

 ages. That is, if some lots are deficient, the fact that other lots 

 exceed their guarantees does not neutralize it ; it is the intent 

 of the law that guarantees be so fixed that all goods of that 

 brand will be in accord with them. Buyers should not allow 

 themselves to be deceived by the practice of some manufactur- 

 ers who use two figures in their guarantees, making their 

 claims in such forms as "Protein 10 to 13 per cent." The 

 upper figure is absolutely without meaning; the only percentage 

 guaranteed is that represented by the lower figure. In other 

 words, goods bearing the statement above are no more likely 

 to carry 13 per cent protein than those with a simple statement 

 of "Protein 10 per cent." While a case probably could not be 



