4273. Adulteration and misbranding of cofifee. . U. S. v. Christxis P. JViclio-?
loulias (Greek-Arabian Coffee Co.). Plea of g-uilty. Fine, $15.?
(P. & D. No. 6675.   . I. S. No. 2408-h.)
On September 22, 1915, the United States attorney for the Southern District?
of New York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the?
District Court of the United States for said district an information against?
Christus P. Nicholoulias, trading as the Greek-Arabian Coffee Co., New York,?
N. Y., alleging the sale by said defendant on June 21, 1913, under a guaranty?
that the article of food was not adulterated or misbranded within the meaning?
of the Food and Drugs Act, of a quantity of coffee which was an adulterated?
and misbranded article of food within the meaning of said act, and which said?
article, in the identical condition in which received, was, on or about July 11,?
1913, shipped by the purchaser thereof from the State of New York into the?
State of Ohio in violation of the Food and Drugs Act. The product was labeled:?
"King Othon Coffee Three Kinds Beans, Ground and Pulverized Turkish Style?
Packed Airtight in Tin Cans, by Greek Arabian Coffee Company New York,?
U. S. A.~ Greek Arabian Coffee Company Cream Mocha trade mark Absolutely?
Pure Guaranteed by Greek Arabian Coffee Co. under the Food and Drugs Act?
June 30, 1906. Serial No. 41955." (Statements in Greek and picture of man in?
Greek costume.)
.Examination of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this?
?department showed it to be principally, if.not entirely, Santos.    No evidence?
of fancy Mocha as indicated on the label was detected.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason?
that a substance, to wit, a mixture of coffees other than Mocha, had been?
substituted, in whole or in part, for cream Mocha -which the article purported?
to be.
' Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, to wit, " Cream?
Mocha " and "Absolutely Pure," regarding the article and the ingredients and?
substances contained therein, were false and misleading, in that they indicated?
that said article was pure Mocha, whereas, in truth and in fact, said article?
was hot pure Mocha, but was, to wit, a mixture of coffees other than Mocha?
containing little, if any, Mocha. Misbranding was alleged for the further?
reason that the article was labeled " Cream Mocha " and "Absolutely Pure " so?
as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that said article was?
pure Mocha, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not pure Mocha, but was a?
mixture of coffees other than Mocha, containing little, if any, Mocha.
On September 28, 1915, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the informa??
tion, and the court imposed a fine of $15.
CAKL VKOOMAN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
396	
BUREAU   OF   CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 16.