NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 2422.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Food and Drugs Act.)
U.  S. v. 100 Cases Crushed Oranges.   Decree of condemnation by consent 
on charge of misbranding.   Goods released on bond.
MISBRANDING   AND   ALLEGED  ADULTERATION   OF   CRUSHED
ORANGES.
On May 23, 1912, the United States Attorney for the District of 
Columbia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, 
filed in the Supreme Court of said District, holding a district court, 
a libel for the seizure and condemnation of 100 cases, each contain- 
ing 48 cans of crushed oranges remaining unsold in the original 
unbroken packages and in possession of the following named parties: 
45 cases in possession of the Washington Storage Co., 5 cases in pos- 
session of Henry P. Kern, 20 cases in possession of G. G. Cornwell 
& Son, 15 cases in possession of the Connecticut Pie Co., 5 cases in 
possession of S. A. Reeves, and 10 cases in possession of Lewis 
Holmes, trading as Holmes & Son, all of Washington, D. C. The 
libel alleged that the product had been shipped on or about April 13, 
1912, by Muns Bros., New York, N. Y., and transported from the 
State of New York into the District of Columbia, and charged 
adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs 
Act. The product was labeled: " Crushed Oranges—Two-Gene's 
Brand—The Orange Canning Co.. Los Angeles and Pomona, Cali- 
fornia. Crushed oranges are crushed from select California tree- 
ripened oranges. By our process of canning the oil cuticles of the 
peel are unaltered and together with the pulp and juice of the best 
oranges, is the most palatable fruit on the market. We add no pre- 
servatives nor sugars of any kind, but sugar or water may be added 
desirable to the taste. These oranges are most conveniently eaten, 
and are better than oranges in their form costing only one-half as 
much. * * * Guaranteed under the Food and Drugs Act of 
June 30, 1906."
92510°—2422—13
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the libel for the reason 
that a valuable constituent thereof, to wit, orange juice, had been 
wholly or in part abstracted. Misbranding was alleged for the rea- 
son that the product was an imitation of and offered for sale under 
the distinctive name of another article, to wit, canned crushed 
oranges, when, in truth and in fact, it was not so, but consisted of 
orange pomace from which the orange juice had been removed. 
Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the product 
was labeled and branded so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser, 
in that the labels thereon bore certain statements as aforesaid regard- 
ing the ingredients and substances contained therein, which state- 
ments were false and misleading, in that they signified and imported 
that the product was canned crushed oranges, whereas in truth and 
in fact it was orange pomace from which the orange juice had been 
removed.
On January 21, 1913, E. L. Klein, trading as the Orange Canning 
Co., claimant, having entered his appearance, consented to a decree, 
and paid the costs of the proceedings, a decree of condemnation and 
forfeiture was entered, the court finding the product misbranded 
only. . It was further ordered by the court that the product should 
be released and delivered to said claimant upon the execution of bond 
in the sum of $300 in conformity with section 10 of the Act.
B. T. GALLOWAY, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, May 7, WIS.
2422
o