5786. Adulteration and misbranding of vinegar. V. S. * * * v. 4 Tanks of Vinegar Compound. Consent decree of condemnation and for- feiture. Product ordered released on bond. (F. & D. No. 8231. I. S. No. 20182-m. S. No. C-689.) On April 21, 1917, the United States attorney for the v Northern District of Texas, 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 condemna- tion of tanks of vinegar compound, remaining unsold in the original tinbroken packages at Dallas, Tex., alleging that the article had been shipped on April 2, 1917, by the Gist-Leo Vinegar Co., Springfield, Mo., and transported from the State of Missouri into the State of Texas, and charging adulteration and mis- branding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act. The article was labeled, " Leo Cider Vinegar Co. Manfs. Pure Cider Vinegar," and was invoiced in part as " Cider vinegar 50 Gr." Adulteration of the article was alleged in substance in the libel for the reason that distilled vinegar or added dilute acetic acid had been mixed and packed therewith so as to reduce and lower and injuriously affect its quality and strength, and had been substituted in part for cider vinegar. Misbranding of the article was alleged in substance for the reason that it was labeled and branded as pure cider vinegar and as cider vinegar, when, in truth and in fact, it was not, but was a combination of such vinegar and dis- tilled vinegar or added dilute acetic acid; and for the further reason that it was an imitation of cider vinegar, and was not cider vinegar or pure cider vinegar, as indicated and represented by its brand and label; and for the further reason that it was labeled and branded so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser in that it was labeled and branded as cider vinegar and pure cider vinegar, when, in truth and in fact, it was not, but was a mixture of such vinegar and distilled vinegar or added dilute acetic acid. On June 13, 1917, the said Gist-Leo Vinegar Co., claimant, having consented to a decree, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court that the product should be delivered to said claimant upon the payment of the costs of the proceedings and the execution of a bond in the sum of $1,000, in conformity with section 10 of the act. QAML YBOOMAB, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.