P. & D. No. 3237.
S. No. 1188.	
Issued May 29, 1912.
United States Department of Agriculture,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY.
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 1482.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Food and Drugs Act.)
ADULTERATION OF TOMATOES.
On November 22, 1911, the United States Attorney for the South??
ern District of Georgia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of?
Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said?
district a libel for the seizure and condemnation of 100 cases of?
tomatoes, each case containing two dozen cans of tomatoes in the?
original unbroken packages, and in possession of Lichenstein &?
Hirsch, Savannah, Ga., alleging that the product had been shipped,?
on or about November 16, 1911, by J. Langrall & Bro., Baltimore,?
Md., from the State of Maryland into the State of Georgia, and?
charging adulteration in violation of the Food and Drugs Act.?
Each case was branded: " Tomatoes Parrot Brand 2 doz. No, 3 cans.?
Trade Mark (Cut of parrot). Packed by J. Langrall and Bro.?
Baltimore, Md." and each of the cans contained in each of the cases?
was branded: " Parrot Brand Tomatoes Hand Packed. J. Langrall?
and Bro. Inc. Baltimore, Md., U. S. A."
Analysis by the Bureau of Chemistry of this Department showed?
the following results:
Can 1.
Meat  (per cent)?
33.3
Juice   (per  cent)?
?66.7
Solids  (percent)?
    3.16
Total reducing sugars as invert (per cent)?
    1.26
Salt-free ash   (per cent)?
      .23
Salt   (per cent)?
    2.52
Citric acid   (per cent)?
      .28
Solids on juice  (percent)?
,?    2.95
Total reducing sugars as invert on juice (per cent)?   1.32
Salt-free ash on juice (per cent)?
      .17
Salt on juice   (per cent)?
    2.71
Can 2.
Meat  (per cent)?
32.0
Solids   (percent)?
    2.91
Total reducing sugars as invert  (per cent)?
    1.00
Salt-free ash   (per cent)?
      .25
41969??No 1482?12
Salt   (per cent)?
?2.40
Citric acid   (per cent)?
?.25
Solids on juice (per cent)?:?
_?2.44
Total reducing sugars as invert (per cent)?
?1.00
Salt-free ash on juice (per cent)?.?
?.23
Salt on juice (percent)?
?2.48
Adulteration was alleged in the libel for the reason that in each?
can of the product there had been put a large quantity of added?
water, to wit, 15 per cent, more or less, which had been substituted?
in part for the tomatoes, and that the tomatoes were thereby low??
ered, reduced, and injuriously affected in their quality and strength.
On January 5, 1912, J. Langrall & Bro. (Inc.), Baltimore, Md.,?
the claimants of the product, having admitted that the facts and?
statements contained in the libel were true, and having presented?
bond in the sum of $300, in conformity with section 10 of the Act, it?
was ordered that upon payment of the costs of the court, the product?
should be released and delivered to the claimant.
W. M. HAYS,?
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, April &?, 1912.
1482