NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 2186.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Food and Drugs Act.)
ADULTERATION    AND    MISBRANDING   OF   PHILLIPS'   DIGESTIBLE
COCOA.
On August 15, 1912, the United States Attorney for the Eastern 
District of Louisiana, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agri- 
culture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said dis- 
trict a libel, and on September 16, 1912, an amended supplemental 
libel, for the seizure and condemnation of 72 packages of Phillips' 
Digestible Cocoa, alleging that the product had been shipped on or 
about July 29, 1912, by the Charles H. Phillips Chemical Co., New 
York, N. Y., and transported from the State of New York into the 
State of Louisiana, and charging adulteration and misbranding in 
violation of the Food and Drugs Act. The product was labeled: 
(On shipping cases) "One Dozen Phillips' Digestible Cocoa Keep in 
a Cool Dry Place Made in Glenbrook, Conn." (On fruit of cans) 
"Sweet Cocoa Phillips' Digestible Cocoa A Delicious and Highly 
Nutritious Compound Easily Digested Half Pound Prepared by 
The Chas. H. Phillips Chemical Company New York." (On back of 
cans) "Phillips' Digestible Cocoa Compound of Cocoa, Sugar, Phos- 
phates, with Vanilla Flavoring. A small proportion of phosphates 
is added, with a view of furnishing increased nutriment."
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the libel for the reason 
that the label on the shipping cases, set forth above, represented 
the product to be digestible cocoa, when, in fact, it was not genuine 
pure cocoa, but was a compound of cocoa, sugar, phosphates, and 
vanilla flavor, and there had been thus mixed and packed with the 
cocoa so as to reduce, lower, and injuriously affect its quality and 
strength, and there had been substituted in part for said cocoa, sugar, 
phosphates, and vanilla flavoring. Misbranding was alleged for the 
reason that the label on the shipping cases, set forth above, repre- 
sented the product to be digestible cocoa, when, in truth and in fact, 
it was a compound of cocoa, sugar, phosphates, and vanilla flavoring, 
which fact was not declared upon the label appearing on the shipping 
cases, and said label in this way bore a statement regarding the prod-
74435°—No. 2186—13
uct and the ingredients thereof which statement was false and mis- 
leading and was such as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into 
believing that the article was genuine cocoa, when in truth and in 
fact it was not. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that 
the principal label upon the cans appeared in large and conspicuous 
type and bore the statement relative to the contents of the cans, that 
it was digestible cocoa, when in truth and in fact, it was not, but was 
a compound of cocoa, sugar, phosphates, and vanilla flavoring, and 
that, by reason of the position of said principal label and the bold 
and conspicuous type in which printed and the manner of its display, 
the statement contained in the label which appeared on the back of 
the can in smaller type and less conspicuously displayed, that the 
product was a compound of cocoa, sugar, and phosphates, with 
vanilla flavoring, was, by reason of its position on the back of the 
can, where the purchaser would not be likely to see same, and by 
reason of the size and inconspicuousness of the type in which it was 
printed, not sufficient to correct the false and misleading statement 
that the product was cocoa which appeared in bold and conspicuous 
type on the principal label on the fruit of the can, and so the prod- 
uct was misbranded in that the label bore a statement as to the ingre- 
dients thereof which was false and misleading, and it was such as to 
deceive and mislead the purchaser.
On November 1, 1912, no claimant having appeared for the prop- 
erty, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and it 
was further ordered that the product should be sold by the United 
States marshal, after relabeling.
W. M. HATS, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C.; January 8, 1918.
2186
o