3158.?Misbranding of wine.     TJ. S. v. 10 Cases of Wine,     Default decree of
condemnation  and   forfeiture.   Product   ordered   sold.    (P.   &   D.   No.
5298.    S. No. 1890.)
On August 13, 1913, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of?
Ohio, 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 con??
demnation of 10 cases of wine, remaining unsold in the original unbroken?
packages at Cleveland, Ohio, alleging that the product had been shipped in?
interstate commerce, on or about July 15, 1913, by the Nectar Co., New York,?
N. Y., consigned to the Adler Co., Cleveland, Ohio, and transported from the?
State of New York into the State of Ohio, and charging misbranding in viola??
tion of the Food and Drugs Act. The product was labeled: (On cases)?
"Champion?24 bottles?Pints". (On bottles, principal label) "(Design of?
charioteer) Champion?Not fermented in the bottle?Guaranteed and produced?
by the N. Co. New York, The Nectar Co. N. Y. U. S. A. Serial No. 26497."?
CNeck label) "Champion (design of charioteer) trade mark regist?U. S. Pat.?
Off. contains about 14 ounces ' extra Dry '" ;? also a foil cap impressed with the?
words " Extra Dry," and a seal or coat of arms.
It was alleged in the libel that the product was misbranded in violation of?
paragraph 1, under " Foods," of section 8 of the act of Congress -approved?
June 30, 1906, commonly known and designated as the Food and Drugs Act, in?
that it was an imitation of champagne. It was also alleged that the product?
was misbranded within the meaning of the first general paragraph of section 8?
of said act and paragraphs 2 and 4, under " Foods," of said section 8, in that?
the statement " Extra Dry," borne on the metal cap and neck label, was false?
and misleading, as it deceived the purchaser into the belief that the article?
was a champagne, whereas in fact it was not a champagne.
On January o, 1914, no claimant having appeared for the property, judg??
ment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered by the?
court that the product should be sold by the United States marshal.
B. T. GALLOWAY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, May 6, 191^.