it injurious to health. The article was labeled in part: "Golden Heart KolePak Brand." On April 29, 1940, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be destroyed. 600. Misbranding of potatoes. U. S. v. 180 Barrels of Potatoes. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 285. Sample No. 69603-D.) Examination showed that these potatoes were of a grade lower than U. S. Grade No. 1, because of excessive grade defects. On July 12, 1939, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York filed a libel against 180 barrels of potatoes at Brooklyn, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about July 1939 [July 8, 1939], by M. Duer & Co., Inc., from Belle Haven, Va.; and charging that it was misbranded in that the statement "U. S. 1" was false and misleading when applied to potatoes below U. S. Grade No. 1. The article was labeled: "Lion Brand U. S. 1." On August 15, 1939, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. CANNED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES 601. Adulteration of canned apricots. U. S. v. 1,083 Cases of Canned Apricots. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1709. Sample Nos. 71554-D, 10247-E.) Samples of this product were found to contain worms and worm fragments. On March 25, 1940, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York filed a libel against 1,083 cases of canned apricots at Brooklyn, N Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about February 8, 1940, by the Banning Canning Co. from Banning, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance. The article was labeled in part: "Bann-Co. Brand Preheated California Apricots." On April 11, 1940, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be destroyed. 602. Adulteration of canned apricots. U. S. v. 500 Cartons of Canned Apricots (and 5 other seizure actions involving canned apricots). Decrees of condemnation. Portion of product ordered released under bond for segregation and destruction of the unfit fruit. Remainder ordered destroyed. (F. D. C. Nos. 1331, 1476, 1561, 1579, 1628, 1766. Sample Nos. 71230-D, 71547-D, 88750-D, 98688-D, 98689-D, 6182-E.) Samples of this product were found to contain insects, worms, and worm excreta. Between January 10 and April 9, 1940, the United States attorneys for the District of New Jersey, the District of Ohio, the Eastern District of New York, the Southern District of Texas, and the District of New Mexico filed libels against 500 cartons of canned apricots at Port Newark, N. J.; 263 cases at Paterson, N. J.; 418 cases at Cincinnati, Ohio; 12 cases at Brooklyn, N. Y.; 15 cases at Corpus Christi, Tex.; and 74 cases at Albuquerque, N. Mex., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce, within the period from on or about July 6, 1939, to on or about January 23, 1940, by Val Vita Food Products, Inc., from Fullerton, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance. The article was labeled in part: "Val Vita Brand Whole Apricots." On April 6, 1940, Val Vita Food Products, Inc., having admitted the allegations of the two libels filed in the District of New Jersey and the cases having been consolidated, judgment of condemnation was entered, and it was ordered that the product be released under bond conditioned that the portion which was fit for human consumption be separated from the unfit portion and that the latter be destroyed. On April 4, April 16, and May 1, 1940, no claimant having appeared in the remaining cases, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 603. Adulteration of canned strawberries. U. S. v. 87 Cans of Processed Straw berries. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1829. Sample No. 7427-E.) Examination of this product showed the presence of moldy strawberries. On April 17, 1940, the United States attorney for the Southern District of California filed a libel against 87 cans of processed strawberries at Long Beach, Calif., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate com merce on or about December 21, 1939, by Pacific Food Products Co. from Seattle, Wash.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it contained a filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance. On May 15, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 604. Adulteration and misbranding of canned peas. U. S. v. 304 Cases of Canned Peas (and 3 other seizure actions involving canned peas). Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 1465, 1466, 1542, 1543. Sample Nos. 73699-D, 73978-D, 73979-D, 86853-D.) This product was found to be in whole or in part decomposed; it consisted of sweet, or sugar, peas and not Early June peas as labeled; and one lot was falsely labeled as to the name of the packer. On February 9 and March 1, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Massachusetts filed libels against 438 cases of canned peas at Boston, Mass., and 725 cases of canned peas at Fitchburg, Mass., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about December 11, 1939, to on or about January 2, 1940, by the Mount Airy Canning Co. from Baltimore, Md.; and charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part variously: "Chapel Brand Food Products Early June Peas Distributed by Talbot Packing Corp., Easton, Md."; or "Tisso Good Brand Early June Peas * Packed by Talbot Packing and Preserving Co., Easton, Md." * * * The article was alleged to be adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement "Early June Peas," borne on the labels, was false and misleading, since it was sweet peas. The Tisso Good brand was alleged to be misbranded further in that the statement, "Packed By Talbot Packing and Preserving Co., Easton, Md., U. S. A., Factories: Cordova and Willoughby, Md.," borne on the label, was false and misleading, since the article was packed by the Mount Airy Canning Co. On March 25 and April 29, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 605. Misbranding of canned peas. U. S. v. 19 Cases and 23 Cases of Canned Peas. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. Product ordered delivered to a charitable institution. (F. D. C. No. 1842. Sample Nos. 10488-E, 10489-E.) Examination showed this article to be soaked dry peas. On April 18, 1940, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York filed a libel against 19 cases and 23 cases of canned peas at New York, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 20, 1939, and February 21, 1940, respectively, by W. H. Roberts & Co. from Baltimore, Md.; and charging that it was misbranded. The article was labeled in part: "Faust Brand Peas Packed for Sentney Wholesale Grocery Co., Hutchinson, Kans."; and "Of Course' P M Brand Alaska Peas Packed for Pratt-Mallory Co., Sioux City, Iowa." The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the labeling on the cans, as set out above, was false and misleading, when applied to articles that were soaked dry peas. On May 9, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered delivered to a charitable institution. 606. Adulteration and misbranding of canned peas. U. S. v. 244 Cases of Peas. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1505. Sample No. 86269-D.) This product was canned soaked dry peas and not Early June peas as labeled. On February 20, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of New Jersey filed a libel against 244 cases of canned peas at Newark, N. J., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about January 18, 1940, by Frederick City Packing Co. from Frederick, Md.; and charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: "Richland Brand Early June Peas." The article was alleged to be adulterated in that soaked dry peas had been substituted wholly or in part for Early June peas. It was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement on the label, "Early June Peas," and the design of peas in pods were false and misleading since it was soaked dry peas. On March 27, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 607. Adulteration of canned peas. U. S. v. 32 Cases of Peas. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1630. Sample No. 7501-E.) This product was weevil-infested. On March 12, 1940, the United States attorney for the Southern District of California filed a libel against 32 cases of canned peas at Riverside, Calif., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 22, 1939, by Pleasant Grove Canning Co. from Provo, Utah; and charging that it was adulterated in that it contained a filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Del Haven Brand Sweet Peas Packed for Federated Foods Inc. San Francisco Chicago." On April 25, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 608. Adulteration of canned hominy. U. S. v. 65 Cases of Canned Hominy. Consent decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1912. Sample No. 6472-E.) This product was found to be decomposed. On May 2, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Colorado filed a libel against 65 cases, each containing 24 cans, of hominy at Denver, Colo., consigned by the Norfolk Packing Co., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about April 4, 1940, from Plattsmouth, Nebr.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The product was labeled in part: "La Platte Hominy Packed for La Platte Sales Co., Peoria, Ill." On May 11, 1940, the Norfolk Packing Co. having consented to the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. De 609. Adulteration of canned sauerkraut. U. S. v. 39 Cases of Sauerkraut. fault decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1122. Sample No. 56217-D.) This product was in interstate commerce at the time of examination, and was found to be undergoing chemical decomposition and to be otherwise unfit for food at that time. On December 1, 1939, the United States attorney for the Northern District of California filed a libel against 39 cases of canned sauerkraut at Oakland, Calif., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about November 21, 1938, by Geneva Preserving Co. from Baltimore, Md.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance and was otherwise unfit for food. It was labeled in part: "Geneva Sauerkraut. Geneva Preserving Co. Geneva, * N. Y." * On January 30, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. TOMATOES AND TOMATO PRODUCTS Nos. 610-622, 624, and 625 report the seizure and disposition of tomato catsup that contained excessive mold, indicating the presence of decomposed material. 610. Adulteration of canned tomato catsup. U. S. v. 48 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1727. Sample No. 13339-E.) On April 1, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Oregon filed a libel against 48 cases of tomato catsup at Portland, Oreg., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about March 8, 1940, by Newbauer & Schmale from San Francisco, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Real-Red Brand Tomato Catsup Made in part from residual tomato material Stockton Food Products Inc. Stockton, Calif." On May 7, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 611. Adulteration and misbranding of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 100 Cases and 431 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 1850, 1975. Sample Nos. 13129-E, 13158-E.) On April 22 and May 16, 1940, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Washington filed libels against 531 cases of tomato catsup at Spokane, Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about November 8, 1939, to on or about February 29, 1940, by Seiters, Inc., from Post Falls, Idaho; and charging that it was adulterated and that one lot was also misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Bottle) "Syringa Brand Tomato Catsup Seiters Inc. Post Falls, Idaho," or "Tastewell Tomato Catsup * Distributors * * * National Retailer-Owned Grocers, Inc. * * Chicago"; (neck label) "Tastewell brand All products bearing this label are guaranteed to comply with the pure food laws." The article was alleged to be adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The Tastewell brand was alleged to be misbranded since it did not comply with the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. On June 1 and June 29, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 612. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 287 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Consent decree entered providing for release of product under bond. (F. D. C. No. 1421. Sample No. 81147-D.) On January 30, 1940, the United States attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania filed a libel against 287 cases of tomato catsup at Erie, Pa., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 4, 1939, by the Lake Erie Canning Co. from Sandusky, Ohio; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The product was labeled in part: "Pure Gold Catsup of Tomatoes." On February 21, 1940, the Lake Erie Canning Co., claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libel, judgment was entered ordering that the product be released to the claimant under bond conditioned that it should not be disposed of in violation of the law. The portion of the product which was found to be unfit was segregated and destroyed and the portion which was wholesome was released. 613. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 498 Cases of Tomato Catsup (and 8 other seizure actions against tomato products). Decrees of condemnation. Product in all lots ordered destroyed. Certain lots taken down under bond for salvaging containers. (F. D. C. Nos. 1080, 1223, 1278, 1373, 1444, 1715, 1720, 1778, 1828. Sample Nos, 48254-D, 66775-D, 67098-D, 72034-D, 72035-D, 72122–D, 6431–E, 6450-E, 8091–E, 8097–E.) Between November 27, 1939, and April 18, 1940, the United States attorneys for the Western District of Oklahoma, Western District of Michigan, District of Kansas, and the District of Minnesota filed libels against 1,831 cases of tomato catsup in various lots at Enid, Oklahoma City, and El Reno, Okla.; 279 cases at Escanaba, Mich.; 240 cases at Topeka, Kans.; and 570 cases at St. Paul, Minn., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce by the Frazier Packing Corporation. On March 27 and April 18, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Colorado filed libels against 579 cases of tomato catsup which had been shipped in interstate commerce by the same firm. It was alleged in the libels that the shipments had been made within the period from on or about March 3, 1939, to on or about January 24, 1940, from Elwood, Ind.; and that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part variously: "Frazier's Tomato Catsup Prepared by Frazier Packing Corp. Elwood Indiana"; "White Birch Brand Catsup Carpenter Cook Co., Menominee, Mich."; "Brimful Brand Tomato Catsup H. A. Marr Grocery Co., Distributors"; "Tee Pee Brand Catsup * Packed for The Theo. Poehler Merc. Co., Lawrence Kansas"; "Blue Rock Brand Tomato Catsup Distributed by Northern Jobbing Company St. Paul Minn."; "Dreher's Tomato Catsup * • Packed for the Dreher Pickle Co., Fort Collins, Colo."; "YB Brand Fancy Tomato Catsup Packed for Yoelin Bros. Merc. Co, Denver Colo." * * The Frazier Packing Corporation entered its appearance in the actions instituted in the Western District of Oklahoma and the District of Kansas and admitted the allegations of the libels filed in said districts. On March 8, 1940, judgment of condemnation was entered in the Western District of Oklahoma, and it was ordered that the product be released to the claimant conditioned that the catsup be destroyed and the containers salvaged. On October 5, 1940, judgment was entered as of March 7, 1940, forfeiting the goods seized in the District of Kansas and ordering their release under bond for similar disposition. Between February 8 and May 3, 1940, no claimant having appeared in the remaining actions, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed. De 614. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 10 Cases of Tomato Catsup. fault decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1615. Sample No. 97247-D.) Samples of this product were found to contain flies in addition to mold. On March 13, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Nebraska filed a libel against 10 cases of tomato catsup at Scottsbluff, Nebr., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 21, 1939, by the Stacy Vorwerk Co. from Cheyenne, Wyo.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a filthy and decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Nation's Garden Brand Tomato Catsup Packed For Fine Foods, Inc. Seattle, Minneapolis." On June 10, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. * * * 615. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 426 Cases and 498 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1559. Sample Nos. 81413-D, 81414-D.) On March 4, 1940, the United States attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania filed a libel against 924 cases of tomato catsup at McKeesport, Pa., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 4, 1939, by the Beutel Pickling & Canning Co. from Bay City, Mich.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Michigan Tomato Catsup, Beutel Pickling & Canning Co."; or Distributed by Potter McCune "Sunny Boy Brand Tomato Catsup Co., McKeesport, Pa." * * On April 22, 1940, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 616. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 54 Cases of Catsup. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1700. Sample No. 97372-D.) On March 25, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Idaho filed a libel against 54 cases of tomato catsup at Twin Falls, Idaho, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 4 and 23, 1939, by the North Ogden Canning Co. from North Ogden, Utah; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Magic Lake Brand Standard Catsup." On April 17, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 617. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 60 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1609. Sample No. 56484-D.) On or about March 9, 1940, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Texas filed a libel against 60 cases of tomato catsup at Houston, Tex., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about January 17, 1940, by the Independent Grocers Alliance Distributors, Inc., from Alameda, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Much More Brand Tomato Catsup Packed for Food Products Co., of America, General Offices, Chicago, Ill." * On April 16, 1940, no claimant having appeared, Judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 618. Adulteration of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 10 Cases and 24 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 1577. Sample Nos. 97365-D, 97368-D.) On March 6, 1940, the United States attorney for the District of Idaho filed a libel against 34 cases of tomato catsup at Twin Falls, Idaho, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about November 27 and December 21, 1939, by the Pacific Fruit & Produce Co. from Salt Lake City, Utah; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The product was labeled in part: “Nation's Garden Brand Tomato Catsup Packed for Fine Foods, Inc., Seattle, Tomato Catsup * Minneapolis"; and "Gateway Brand Perry Canning Co., Perry, Utah." * * On April 17, 1940, no claimant having appeared, Judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. |