Page images
PDF
EPUB

300 cases each containing 72 cans of tomato sauce at Houston, Tex., alleging that the articles had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 9 and 31, 1941, by Val Vita Food Products, Inc., from Oakland and Fullerton, Calif.; and charging that they were adulterated in that they consisted in whole or in part of decomposed substances. The articles were labeled in part: "Val Vita Brand Tomato Catsup Se * 14 oz. [or "Spanish Style Tomato Sauce

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

*

On February 13 and March 10, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the products were ordered destroyed. 3133. Adulteration of tomato juice. U. S. v. 200 Cases, 50 Cases, 50 Cases, and 41 Cases of Tomato Juice. Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 6552, 6919. Sample Nos. 75794-E, 75795-E, 75796–E, 90300-E, 90312-E.)

On December 22, 1941, and February 21, 1942, the United States attorney for the District of Massachusetts filed libels against a total of 300 cases of varioussized cans of tomato juice at Brockton, Mass., and 41 cases at Worcester, Mass., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 22 and 29, 1941, by Holley Canning Co., Inc., from Holley, N. Y.; 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: (Cans) "Armour's Star Tomato Juice * 串 Armour and Company Distributors."

*

On March 2 and 23, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

8134. Adulteration of tomato juice. U. S. v. 40 Cases of Tomato Juice.

Default

decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 6581. Sample No. 90275-E.)

On December 26, 1941, the United States attorney for the District of Massachusetts filed a libel against 40 cases of tomato juice at Greenfield, Mass., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 18, 1941, by Barker Canning Corporation from Barker, N. Y.; and charging it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: (Cans) "Our Table Brand Tomato Juice."

On January 26, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

8135. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. William S. Swett (Knox Pickle & Preserve Works). Plea of guilty. Fine, $25. (F. D. C. No. 5510. Sample

Nos. 47136-E, 47144-E.)

On November 19, 1941, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Indiana filed an information against William S. Swett, trading as Knox Pickle & Preserve Works at Sidney, Ind., alleging shipment on or about December 5, 1940, and January 10, 1941, from the State of Indiana into the State of Illinois, of quantities of tomato puree that was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "Blossom * * 'Tomato Puree Distributed By Sprague, Warner & Company Chicago, Ill."

On February 17, 1942, the defendant having entered a plea of guilty, the court imposed a fine of $25.

3136. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 398 Cases of Tomato Puree. Default decree of destruction. (F. D. C. No. 6229. Sample No. 58835-E.)

On November 15, 1941, the United States attorney for the District of Minnesota filed a libel against 398 cases, each containing 6 No. 10 cans, of tomato puree at Minneapolis, Minn., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about September 20, 1941, by Butterfield Canning Co. from Muncie, Ind.; 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: (Cans) "Indiano Brand Puree of Tomatoes."

On January 15, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment was entered ordering that the product be destroyed.

3137. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 69 Cases of Tomato Puree. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 6236. Sample No. 18019-E.)

On November 17, 1941, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Alabama filed a libel against 69 cases of tomato puree at Catherine, Ala.,

alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about September 18, 1941, by the Houghland Packing Co. from Franklin, Ind.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of a decomposed substance.

On January 22, 1942, no claimant having appeared, a decree pro confesso and final decree of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 3138. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 199 Càses, 91 Cases, and 132 Cases of Tomato Puree. Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 6646, 7452. Sample Nos, 79603-E, 80079-E, SOOSO-E.)

On January 2 and May 2, 1942, the United States attorneys for the Eastern District of Kentucky and the Southern District of Ohio filed libels against 199 cases of tomato puree at Covington, Ky. and 223 cases at Hamilton, Ohio, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about November 18, 1941, and March 9, 1942, by the Ladoga Canning Co., from Lebanon, Ind.; 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) "Sugar Loaf Tomato Puree"; or "Ladoga Brand Tomato Puree"; or "Freco Brand Tomato Puree."

On January 26 and June 11, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

3139. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 398 Cases of Tomato Puree.

Default

decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 6727. Sample No. 89021-E.) On January 19, 1942, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York filed a libel against 398 cases of tomato puree at Brooklyn, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 15, 1941, by F. H. Leggett & Co. from Quinton, N. J.; 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: (Cans) "Empress Brand Tomato Puree.

On February 20, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

3140. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 106, 200, and 496 Cases of Tomato Puree. Consent decrees of condemnation. Portions of product ordered destroyed. Remainder ordered released under bond for segregation and destruction of unft portion. (F. D. C. Nos. 6709, 6732, 6739. Sample Nos. 65934- E, 65943 E, 65944-E, 65948-E.)

All lots of this product contained mold, and portions also contained worm and insect fragments.

* * *

[ocr errors]

On January 28, 1942, the United States attorney for the District of Colorado filed libels against 802 cases of tomato puree at Denver, Colo., which had been consigned by the Rocky Mountain Packing Corporation, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about November 12 to on or about December 30, 1941, from Roy and Murray, Utah; and charging that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy and decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: (Cans) “Brimfull Brand Tomato Puree, Distributors H. A. Marr Grocery Co., Denver, Colo."; or "Glennwood Brand Tomato Puree Distributed by Rocky Mountain l'acking Corporation." On February 19, 1942, the Rocky Mountain Packing Corporation, having consented to the entry of decrees, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed. On March 12, 1942, the Rocky Mountain Packing Corporation having appeared and moved the amendment of the decree entered against 496 cases of the product, and having admitted the allegations of the libel, an amended decree was entered condemning the product and ordering that the 496 cases be released under bond for segregation and destruction of the unfit codes under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration.

3141. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 416 Cases and 334 Cases of Tomato Puree. Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 6558, 6765. Sample Nos, 84708 E, 89036–E.)

On December 23, 1941, and January 26, 1942, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York filed libels against 750 cases, each containing 6 No. 10 cans, of tomato puree at New York, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 24 and

November 5, 1941, and January 5, 1942, by Salem County Canners, Inc., from Quinton, N. J.; 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: (Cans) "Empress Brand Tomato Puree F. H. Leggett & Co. Distributors New York, N. Y."

On March 2, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

3142. Adulteration of tomato puree. U. S. v. 899 Cases of Tomato Puree. Consent decree of condemnation. Product ordered released under bond for segregation. (F. D. C. No. 6848. Sample No. 84879-E.)

On or about February 11, 1942, the United States attorney for the District of Connecticut filed a libel against 899 cases, each containing 6 No. 10 cans, of tomato puree at Hartford, Conn., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about September 17, 1941, by Vincennes Packing Corporation from Plainville, Ind.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance.

On April 27, 1942, Vincennes Packing Corporation, claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libel, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond conditioned that the portion of the product found to comply with the requirements of the law be segregated under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration, and that the remainder be destroyed.

3113. 13. Adulteration of tomato paste. U. S. v. Hartmann Canning Co., Ine. Plea of guilty. Fines, $400; payment of $300 suspended. (F. D. C. No. 5506. Sample Nos. 34720-E, 36484-E, 46392-E, 46397-E.)

On December 1, 1941, the United States attorney for the Western District of New York filed an information against Hartmann Canning Co., Inc., a corporation at Macedon, N. Y., alleging shipment within the period from on or about September 26, 1940, to on or about January 25, 1941, from the State of New York into the States of Connecticut and Massachusetts, of quantities of tomato paste that was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: (Cans) "Scarlati Tomato Paste With Sweet Basil."

On February 23, 1942, the defendant having entered a plea of guilty, the court imposed a fine of $100 on each count, totaling $400. Payment of the fines en counts II, III, and IV was suspended.

3144. Adulteration of tomato paste. U. S. v. 2,000 Cases and 2,000 Cases of Tomato Paste. Consent decree of condemnation. Product ordered released under bond for segregation and destruction of unfit portion. (F. D. C. No 6514. Sample No. 23229-E.)

On December 13 and 30, 1941, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed libels against 4,000 cases, each containing 6 cans, of tomato paste at Philadelphia, Pa., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about November 17, 1941, by Hershel California Fruit Products Co., Inc., from San Jose, Calif.; 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: (Cans) "Contadina Tomato Paste Contents 7 Lbs."

On March 17, 1912, Hershel California Fruit Products Co., Inc., having appeared as claimant, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond for segregation and destruction of the unfit portion under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration.

3145. Adulteration of tomato paste. U. S. v. 60 Cases of Tomato Paste. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 6633. Sample No. 22777.)

On December 31, 1941, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed a libel against 60 cases of tomato paste at Philadelphia, Pa., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 15, 1941, by the Manteca Canning Co. from Manteca, Calif.; and chaging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: (Can) "Tux Brand Tomato Paste."

On April 1, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

3146. Adulteration of tomato paste.

U. S. v. 34 Cases of Tomato Paste. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 3910. Sample No. 3:020-E.)

On March 3, 1941, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York filed a libel against 34 cases of tomato paste at Brooklyn, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about April 28, 1940, by Soc. Au. Rinaldi from Naples, Italy; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. It was labeled in part: "Natural Tomato Paste With Basil Leaf-G. Rinaldi Tomato Star Brand."

On May 21, 1942, Rinaldi Bros. & Co., claimant, having failed to answer the allegations of the libel, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

3147. Adulteration of tomato paste. U. S. v. 41 Cases of Tomato Paste (and 2 other seizure actions against tomato paste). Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 6631, 6775, 6890. Sample Nos. 53663-E, 74475-E, 74476-E, 84087-E.)

On December 31, 1941, and January 29 and February 19, 1942, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York filed libels against 90 cases and 133 cartons of tomato paste at Brooklyn, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about October 23, 1941, to on or about January 5, 1942, by Uddo Taormina Corporation from Wilmington and Buena Park, Calif.; 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: (Cans) "Flag Brand Tomato Paste"; "Pinocchio Brand Italian Style Tomato Paste with sweet basil Distributed By A. M. S. Packing Company, Brooklyn, N. Y."; or "Progresso Brand Packed For La Sierra Heights Canning Co., Inc. Buena Park, California Tomato Paste with Basil."

* *

On February 6 and March 20 and 24, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 3148. Adulteration of tomato sauce. U. S. v. 199 Cases of Tomato Sauce. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 6257. Sample No. 23527-E.)

On November 19, 1941, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Texas filed a libel against 199 cases of tomato sauce at Houston, Tex., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about November 6, 1941, by the Independent Grocers Alliance Distributors, Inc., 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: (Cans) "Val Vita Brand Spanish Style Tomato Sauce * Packed By Val Vita Food Products, Inc. Fullerton California."

[ocr errors]

On March 10, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

OTHER FRUIT AND VEGETABLE PRODUCTS

3149. Adulteration and misbranding of jams, jellies, and preserves. U. S. v. 75 Cases of Jelly (and 6 other seizure actions against jams, jellies, and preserves). Default decrees of condemnation, Portion of products ordered delivered to charitable institutions; remainder ordered destroyed. (F. D. C. Nos. 4091, 4553, 6232, 6233, 6376, 6757, 6836, 6893. Sample Nos. 29761-E, 43175-E, 46962-E, 46963-E, 51895-E, 87362-E, 87364-E, 89301-E, 89305-E.)

Examination showed that these products failed to meet the requirements for Jams, jellies, and preserves set forth in the definition and standard of identity for jams, jellies, and preserves prescribed by regulations as provided by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Between March 29, 1941, and February 21, 1942, the United States attorneys for the Western District of Oklahoma, Eastern District of Kentucky, Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, District of Massachusetts, and the Eastern District of Virginia filed libels against the following products: 75 cases each containing 6 cans of jelly at Oklahoma City, Okla.; 200 cases each containing 6 cans of jam at Fort Thomas, Ky.; 7 cases each containing 24 jars of jelly and 5 cases each containing 24 jars and 4 cases each containing 12 jars of preserves at New York, N. Y., and 10 cases each containing 6 jars of preserves and 23 30-pound pails of jam at Brooklyn, N. Y.; 27 cases each containing 12 jars of preserves at Boston, Mass.; and 35 cases each containing 24 jars of preserves at Norfolk, Va., alleging that the articles had been shipped in interstate commerce

* * *

within the period from on or about January 14, 1941, to on or about January 22, 1942, by Fresh Grown Preserve Corporation from Lyndhurst and Kingsland, N. J.; and charging that they were adulterated and misbranded. They were labeled in part: "Nature's Own Pure Crab Apple [or "Raspberry," "Currant," "Grape,” "Blackberry," or "Quince"] Net Weight 8 Lbs."; "Nature's Own Pure Jam, Net Weight 8 Lbs."; "Magnetic Brand Pure Grape Jelly Net Wgt 1 Pound Distributed by Magnetic Products New York, N. Y."; "Top Notch Brand Pure Raspberry [or "Blackberry"] Preserve Contents 2 Lbs. [or "6 Ozs"] Sun Distributing Co. Inc. Distributors Bklyn, N. Y."; "Son-Ripe Brand Top-Notch Pure Strawberry Preserves Net Weight 4 Lb."; "Kent Food Bklyn 30 Lbs Net Pure Rasp. Jam"; or "Sonripe Brand Top Notch Pure Raspberry Preserve Contents 6 Ozs. Sun Distributing Co. Inc. Distributors Lyndhurst, N. J."

The articles were alleged to be adulterated: (75 cases of jelly) in that imitation crab-apple, raspberry, currant, grape, blackberry, and quince jelly deficient in fruit juice had been substituted wholly or in part for crab-apple, raspberry, currant, grape, blackberry, and quince jelly as defined in the definition and standard of identity for such foods; (7 cases of jelly) in that an imitation grape jelly deficient in fruit juice and artificially colored had been substituted wholly or in part for grape jelly as defined in the definition and standard of identity for such food; (preserves) in that imitation raspberry, strawberry, and blackberry preserves deficient in fruit had been substituted wholly or in part for raspberry, strawberry, and blackberry preserves as defined in the definition and standard of identity for such foods; (200 cases of jam) in that imitation blackberry, grape, peach, loganberry, apricot, or raspberry jam, deficient in fruit, had been substituted wholly or in part for blackberry, grape, peach, loganberry, apricot, or raspberry jam as defined in the definition and standard of identity for such foods; and (23 pails of jam) in that imitation raspberry jam had been substituted wholly or in part for raspberry jam as defined in the definition and standard of identity for such food.

All lots of the articles were alleged to be misbranded (1) in that they were imitations of other foods and their labels failed to bear in type of uniform size and prominence the word "imitation" and immediately thereafter the names of the foods imitated; and (2) in that they purported to be foods for which definitions and standards of identity had been prescribed by regulations as provided by law, and they failed to conform to such definitions and standards.

They were alleged to be misbranded further: (75 cases of jelly) in that the names "Pure Raspberry [or "Crab Apple," "Currant," "Grape," "Blackberry," or "Quince"] Jelly" were false and misleading as applied to articles deficient in fruit juice; (7 cases of jelly) in that the name "Pure Grape Jelly" was false and misleading as applied to an article that was deficient in fruit juice and was artificially colored, and in that it contained artificial coloring and failed to bear labeling stating that fact; (preserves, all lots) in that the names "Pure Raspberry [or "Strawberry" or "Blackberry"] Preserves" were false and misleading as applied to articles that were deficient in fruit; (5 cases only) in that the statement of contents "16 Oz." was not expressed in terms of the largest unit contained in the package; and (jams) in that the names "Pure Blackberry [or "Grape," "Peach," "Loganberry," "Apricot," or "Raspberry"] Jam" were false and misleading as applied to articles of food deficient in fruit.

Between May 28, 1941, and May 28, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the products at Oklahoma City, Fort Thomas, and New York were ordered delivered to charitable institutions; and the remainder was ordered destroyed.

3150. Adulteration and misbranding of jams. U. S. v. 80 Cases and 50 Cases of Assorted Jams. Consent decree of condemnation. Products ordered released under bond for relabeling. (F. D. C. Nos. 6827, 6946. Sample Nos. 85754-E, 85756-E to 85760-E, incl., 85785-E to 85787-E, incl., 85795-E.) Analysis showed that these products were insufficiently cooked, since the soluble-solids content of the finished jams was less than 68 percent.

On February 13, 1942, the United States attorney for the Western District of Washington filed a libel against 130 cases of fruit jams at Seattle, Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about December 1, 1941, to February 7, 1942, by Oswego Jelly Co. from Portland, Oreg.; and charging that they were adulterated and misbranded. They were labeled in part: "Standby Boysenberry [or "Blackberry," "Raspberry." "Strawberry," or "Blackcap Seedless"] Jam Packed for Fine Foods, Inc., Seattle-Minneapolis."

« PreviousContinue »