but its quality fell below such standard, and its label failed to bear, in such manner and form as the regulations specify, a statement that it fell below such standard.

On November 6, 1941, the W. D. Ross Co., claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libel, judgment of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be released under bond conditioned that it be relabeled in compliance with the law and that the label must include the statement, "Mixed Pieces of Irregular Sizes and Shapes."

2733. Misbranding of canned pears. U. S. v. 25 Cases of Canned Pears. Default decree of forfeiture and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 4741. Sample No. 60564-E.)

These pears were not tender and were excessively trimmed and thereby fell below the standard of quality prescribed by regulations as provided by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; but their labels did not bear in such manner and form as the regulations specify, a statement that they fell below such standard, viz, "Below Standard in Quality-Good Food-Not High Grade." This product also failed to conform to the prescribed definition and standard of identity for canned pears because its label did not bear the name of the optional pear ingredient, viz, "Pear Halves"; nor the name of the optional liquid packing medium, viz, “Medium Sirup.”

On May 9, 1941, the United States attorney for the District of Idaho filed a libel against 25 cases, each containing 6 No. 10 cans, of pears at Lewiston, Idaho, alleging that the article had been shipped on or about September 24, 1940, by F. W. Dustan & Son from Clarkston, Wash.; and charging that it was misbranded. It was labeled in part: “Juliaetta Brand Pears."

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that it purported to be a food for which a standard of quality had been prescribed by regulations as provided by law, but it was substandard in quality [for tenderness] because a weight of more than 300 grams was required to pierce each of the units tested, and [for trim] in that the halves were trimmed so excessively that their normal shape was not preserved; and the label did not bear in such manner and form as the regulations specify, a statement that it fell below such standard.

It was alleged to be misbranded further in that it purported to be a food for which a definition and standard of identity had been prescribed, but it failed to conform to such standard because its label did not bear the name of the optional pear ingredient and of the optional liquid packing medium present therein.

On June 4, 1941, no claimant having appeared, judgment of forfeiture was entered, and the product was ordered destroyed.

2734. Misbranding of canned corn. U. S. v. 750 Cases of Canned Corn (and 3 other seizures of canned corn). Consent decrees of condemnation. Product ordered released under bond for relabeling. (F. D. C. Nos. 4444, 4510. Sample Nos. 14297-E, 69019-E to 69021-E, incl.)

This corn not only was overmature, but a portion was found to contain kernels that were off color and off flavor because of scorching. A portion that was labeled "Country Gentleman Corn" failed to bear on the label the name of the food specified in the definition and standard of identity, that is, "White Sweet Corn," "White Corn," or "White Sugar Corn."

On April 23 and 25, 1941, the United States attorneys for the District of New Jersey and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed libels against 941 cases each containing 24 No. 2 cans of corn at Newark, N. J., and 750 cases each containing 24 No. 2 cans of corn at East Lansdowne, Pa., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about December 21, 1940, and January 27, 1941, by Stoops Packing Co. from Van Wert, Ohio; and charging that it was misbranded. It was labeled in part: "Uco Our Best [or "The Better"] Grade Fancy Cream Style Golden [or "Country Gentleman"] Sweet Corn"; or "Tigo Brand Fancy Cream Style Golden Sweet Corn."

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the term "Fancy" was false and misleading as applied to an article (750 cases) that was not Fancy because of the presence of overmature corn; (850 cases) that was not Fancy because of the presence of overmature corn and of off color and flavor due to scorching; and (91 cases) that was not Fancy because of the presence of old and tough kernels. A portion of the product was alleged to be misbranded further in that it purported to be a food for which a definition and standard of identity had been prescribed by regulations as provided by law, but the labels failed to bear the name of the food specified in the definition and standard. On May 12 and 14, 1941, Stoops Packing Co., claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libels, judgments of condemnation were entered and the

product was ordered released under bond to be relabeled under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration.

2735. Adulteration of canned peas and carrots.

U. S. v. 20 Cases of Canned Peas and Carrots. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 5775. Sample No. 61365–E.)

Examination of this product showed that the peas contained weevils. On September 20, 1941, the United States attorney for the District of Oregon filed a libel against 20 cases of canned peas and carrots at Portland, Oreg., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about August 16, 1941, by Nelson Packing Co. from San Francisco, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a filthy substance. It was labeled in part: (Cans) "Dinette Dried Sweet

*

On November 7, 1941, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

Nos. 2736 and 2737 report the seizure and disposition of canned peas that fell below the standard of quality for canned peas because of excessive mealiness, as evidenced by the fact that their alcohol-insoluble solids were more than 23.5 percent, and they were not labeled to indicate that they were of substandard quality.

2736. Misbranding of canned peas. U. S. v. 89 Cases of Canned Peas (and 3 other seizure actions against canned peas). Decrees of condemnation. Portion of product ordered released under bond to be relabeled; remainder ordered distributed to charitable institutions. (F. D. C. Nos. 5816, 5834, 5878, 6338. Sample Nos. 56288-E, 74040-E, 74487-E, 74833–E.) On or about September 24 and 29 and on December 3, 1941, the United States attorneys for the District of New Jersey and the District of Connecticut filed libels against 89 cases each containing 24 No. 2 cans of peas at Jersey City, 323 cases each containing 24 No. 2 cans of peas at Clifton, and 1,053 cases each containing 24 No. 2 cans of peas at Irvington, N. J., and 29 cases each containing 24 No. 2 cans of peas at New Haven, Conn., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about February 17 to on or about June 24, 1941, by Lineboro Canning Co., in part from Baltimore and in part from Lineboro, Md.; and charging that it was misbranded. It was labeled in part: (Cans) "Rugby [or "Taste Best"] Brand Early June Peas Packed By Lineboro Canning Co., Inc. Lineboro, Md.," or "Cargo Early June Peas United Grocery Co. Distributors Irvington, N. J.”

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that it purported to be a food for which a standard of quality had been prescribed by regulations as provided by law, but its quality fell below such standard and its label failed to bear, in such manner and form as the regulations specify, a statement that it fell below such standard.

On December 18 and 23, 1941, no claimant having appeared for the product seized at Jersey City and New Haven, judgments of condemnation were entered and it was ordered distributed to charitable institutions on condition that the labels first be destroyed. On December 23, 1941, and March 25, 1942, Lineboro Canning Co., claimant for the 323 cases seized at Clifton, and United Grocery Co., claimant for the 1,053 cases scized at Irvington, having admitted the allegations of the libels, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered released under bond to be relabeled under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration.

2737. Misbranding of canned peas. U. S. v. 66 Cases of Canned Peas. Default decree of condemnation. Product ordered delivered to a charitable Institution. (F. D. C. No. 3589. Sample No. 28967-E.)

On December 28, 1940, the United States attorney for the Northern District of West Virginia filed a libel against 66 cases of canned peas at Charles Town, W. Va.. alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about July 6 and 15, 1940, by D. C. Winebrener & Son, Inc., to the place of business of the shipper, Charles Town, W. Va.; and charging that it was misbranded. The article was labeled in part: “Carroll County Brand Early June Peas Contents 1 Lb. 4 Ozs. Packed by Bankert Bros. Hampstead, Md.”

It was alleged to be misbranded in that it purported to be a food for which a standard of quality had been prescribed by regulations as provided by law, but its quality fell below such standard and its label did not bear in such manner and form as the regulations specify, a statement that it fell below the said standard.

On January 29, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment was entered finding the product misbranded but providing that it be delivered to a charitable institution for the use of that institution.

2738. Adulteration of canned spinach, U. S. v. 83 Cases of Spinach. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 5080. Sample No. 25729-E.)

Examination showed that this product was undergoing active chemical decomposition.

On July 3, 1941, the United States attorney for the Middle District of Alabama filed a libel against 83 cases, each containing 6 cans, of spinach at Montgomery, Ala., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about February 13, 1941, by George F. Porbeck Brokerage Co. from Little Rock, Ark.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: (Cans) "D and W Contents 6 Lbs. 2 Ozs. Spinach Packed

* **

By Dodgen & Wilson Canning Co. Barton, Ark."

On October 8, 1941, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

2739. Adulteration of canned spinach. U. S. v. 800 Cases of Canned Spinach. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 5602. Sample Nos. 79827-E, 79828-E.)

This product had undergone chemical decomposition and was otherwise unfit for food because of its metallic and astringent taste.

On August 30, 1941, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Ohio filed a libel against 800 cases of canned spinach at Lebanon, Ohio, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about June 23 and July 10, 1941, by Wilson Canning Co. from Barton, Ark.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance and was otherwise unfit for food. The article was unlabeled.

On October 1, 1941, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

TOMATOES AND TOMATO PRODUCTS

Nos. 2740 to 2752 (except 2741) report actions based on the shipment of tomatoes and tomato products that contained decomposed material, as evidenced by the presence of excessive mold.

2740. Adulteration of temato catsup. U. S. v. Fettig Canning Corporation. Plea of guilty. Fine, $100. (F. D. C. No. 4192. Sample Nos. 29446-E, 43241–E, 47446-E, 62416–E.)

On February 11, 1942, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Indiana filed an information against Fettig Canning Corporation, alleging shipment within the period from on or about October 24, 1940, to on or about May 22, 1941, from the State of Indiana into the States of Ohio, Oklahoma, and Illinois, of quantities of tomato catsup that was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Sunbeam Tomato Catsup Francis H. Leggett & Co. Distributors, New York, N. Y."; "Belle Isle * Tomato Catsup * * * Distributed By Collins-Dietz-Morris Co. Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Lawton"; or "Tolman's Tomato Catsup ** Distributed By * ** The Warfield Company Chicago, Ill."

串

On April 17, 1942, a plea of guilty was entered on behalf of the defendant and the court imposed a fine of $100.

2741. Adulteration of tomato catsup and chili sauce. U. S. v. Kern Food Produets, Inc. Plea of nolo contendere. Fine, $250. (F. D. C. No. 5576. Sample Nos. 53224-E, 60265-E.)

These products contained worm and insect fragments. On March 11, 1942, the United States attorney for the Southern District of California filed an information against Kern Food Products, Inc., a corporation, Los Angeles, Calif., alleging shipment on or about March 31 and May 20, 1941, from the State of California into the States of Washington and Arizona, of quantities of tomato catsup and chili sauce that were adulterated. The articles were labeled in part: “Kern's Pure Chili Sauce," or "California Club Pure Tomato Catsup."

Both products were alleged to be adulterated in that they consisted in whole or in part of filthy substances.

On March 30, 1942, a plea of nolo contendere having been entered on behalf of the defendant, the court imposed a fine of $250.

2742. Adulteration of tomato catsup, tomato sauce, hot sauce, and canned tomatoes. U. S. v. Stockton Food Products, Inc. Plea of guilty. Fine, $1,300. (F. D. C. No. 2897. Sample Nos. 56459-D, 56484-D, 56486-D, 56494-D, 56495-D, 72963-D, 92328-D, 92329-D, 92331-D, 92345-D, 92355-D, 92378-D, 92505-D, 92508-D, 9184-E, 9185-E, 9287-E, 12403-E, 12404-E, 12409-E, 12708–E, 13110-E, 13339-E, 13586-E to 13588-E, incl.)

Portions of these products contained excessive mold, other portions contained worm and insect fragments, and in the remainder both conditions were found. On May 14, 1941, the United States attorney for the Northern District of California filed an information against Stockton Food Products, Inc., a corporation at Stockton, Calif., alleging shipment and delivery for introduction in interstate commerce within the period from on or about October 25, 1939, to on or about March 12, 1940, from the State of California into the States of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and the Territory of Hawaii, of quantities of tomato catsup, tomato sauce, hot sauce, and canned tomatoes that were adulterated.

6

6 Lbs.

The articles were labeled in part: (Catsup, cans) "Much More Brand Tomato Catsup * * * 6 Lbs. 10 Ozs. Packed for Food Products Co. of America * ** Chicago, Ill.," "Real Red Brand Tomato Catsup Lb. 12 Oz.," "M S C Makes Satisfied Customers Tomato Catsup 12 Oz. Packed for Recorg Supply Corporation Chicago," or "Racquet Brand Tomato Catsup 6 Lbs. 12 Ozs. * * * Harcourt Greene Co. Distributors San Francisco"; (tomato sauce, cans) "Dellford Brand Tomato Sauce 8 Oz. Avd. Middendorf & Rohrs Distributors New York," "8 Oz. U/L Tom. Sauce," "Fargo Brand Spanish Style Tomato Sauce * * 8 Oz. Packed for Food Products Co. of America Chicago, Ill.," "Happy Home ** * 74 Oz. Avoir. Spanish Style Tomato Sauce Schwabacher Bros. & Co., Inc. Seattle, Wash. Distributors," "Standby Fancy Tomato Sauce * * * 74 Oz. Avd. Packed for Fine Foods, Inc. Seattle Minneapolis," "Royal Clover Brand Spanish Style Tomato Sauce * 74 [or "8"] Oz.

* * *

*

*

*

*

* * *

Avoir. * Distributed by B. H. Rudo & Brother [or "Royal Clover Distributing Co."] Baltimore, Md.," "Red & White Brand * * Tomato Sauce * 74 Oz. Red & White Corp'n Distributor Chicago," or "Shurfine Fancy Tomato Sauce Spanish Style 734 Ozs. ⭑ National Retailer-Owned Grocers, Inc. Distributors * ** Chicago"; (hot sauce, cans) "Nation's Garden Brand Spanish Style Hot Sauce * * 7 Oz. Avd. * Packed for Fine Foods, Inc. Seattle-Minneapolis," "For All Brand Hot Sauce * 72 Oz. * Harcourt Greene Co. Distributors San Francisco, Calif.," or "Brimfull Brand Hot Sauce 74 Oz. Distributed by Kitchen Products, Inc., Chicago"; and (tomatoes, cans) "Tastewell * Tomatoes * National Retailer-Owned Grocers,

*

The articles were alleged to be adulterated in that they consisted in whole or in part of filthy and/or decomposed substances.

On September 8, 1941, a plea of guilty having been entered on behalf of the defendant, the court imposed a fine of $50 on each count, totaling $1,300. 2743. Adulteration and misbranding of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 350 Cases, 249 Cases, and 231 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 5308, 6358. Sample Nos. 62416-E, 73464-E, 73465-E.)

Examination showed that this product contained decomposed material as evidenced by the presence of excessive mold. The bottles in one lot failed to bear a label containing the name of the product, the name and address of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor, and a statement of the quantity of the contents. On August 8 and December 4, 1941, the United States attorneys for the Northern District of Illinois and the Western District of Oklahoma filed libels (the former was amended on October 14, 1941) against 350 cases each containing 12 bottles of tomato catsup at Chicago, Ill., and 480 cases each containing 24 bottles of tomato catsup at Oklahoma City, Okla., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about May 19 and October 15, 1941, by Fettig Canning Corporation from Elwood, Ind.; and charging that it was adulterated and that a portion was also misbranded. It was labeled in part: (350 cases) "All products bearing this label

*

are guaranteed to comply with the pure food laws"; (249 cases) "Vine-Ripe Tomato Catsup 14 Oz."; or (231 cases) "14 Oz. Catsup White Pony." The article was alleged to be adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance.

The portion of the product seized at Chicago was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the statement, "All products bearing this label are guaranteed to comply with the pure food laws," was false and misleading; (2) in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor; (3) in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing an accurate statement of the quantity of contents; and (4) in that its label failed to bear the common or usual name of the food.

On October 16, 1941, and January 6, 1912, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

C. No. 3792. Sample No. 31550-E.)

2744. Adulteration and misbranding of tomato catsup. U. S. v. 599 Cases of Tomato Catsup. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. On February 7, 1941, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan filed a libel against 599 cases, each containing 24 bottles, of tomato catsup at Detroit, Mich., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 12, 1940, by Reid, Murdoch & Co. from Pierceton, Ind.; and charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. It was labeled in part: (Bottles) "Monarch Tomato Catsup Guaranteed By Reid, Murdoch & Co., To Comply With All Food Laws."

The article was alleged to be adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance. It was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement "Guaranteed To Comply With All Food Laws" was false and

misleading since it was incorrect.

On February 24, 1941, Reid, Murdoch & Co. having petitioned that it be furnished samples and certain information, the court ordered the Government to furnish the petitioner with a true copy of the analysis together with identification marks or numbers, if any, of the cases or packages from which any samples analyzed by the Government had been obtained and also ordered that representative samples be delivered to the petitioner and the Government.

On July 17, 1941, no claim or answer having been filed and the court having found that the allegations of the libel were true, judgment of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.

2745. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. Butterfield Canning Co.

Plea of

guilty. Fine, $75. (F. D. C. No. 5552. Sample Nos. 29175-E, 38950-E.) On February 11, 1942, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Indiana filed an information against the Butterfield Canning Co., a corporation, Muncie, Ind., alleging shipment on or about September 7, 1940, and May 2, 1941, from the State of Indiana into the States of Ohio and Minnesota of quantities of tomato puree which was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Indiano Brand Tomato Puree."

On April 17, 1942, a plea of guilty having been entered on behalf of the defendant, the court imposed a fine of $75.

2746. Receipt in interstate commerce and delivery of adulterated tomato puree. U. S. v. Ferdinand C. Knoebel (Knoebel Mercantile Co.) and Karl A. Seastone. Pleas of nolo contendere. Each defendant fined $300. (F. D. C. No. 4187. Sample Nos. 44636-E, 44649–E.)

On October 31, 1941, the United States attorney for the District of Colorado filed an information against Ferdinand C. Knoebel, trading as Knoebel Mercantile Co., Denver, Colo., and Karl A. Seastone, alleging that on or about October 15, 1940, the defendants received in interstate commerce a quantity of canned tomato puree that was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance; and that on or about January 31, 1941, the defendants proferred for delivery and delivered to a firm in Denver, Colo., 25 cases of the same adulterated canned tomato puree. The information further alleged that the said adulterated canned tomato puree had been shipped in interstate commerce by the Perry Canning Co. from Perry, Utah, on or about October 9, 1940. It was labeled in part: "Gateway Brand Tomato Puree Perry Canning Co., Packers and Distributors, Perry, Utah."

On November 22, 1941, pleas of nolo contendere having been entered by the defendants, the court sentenced them each to pay a fine of $300.