855S.   Adulteration   and   misbranding   of   olive   oil.     V.    S.      *?*      *      v.    12
Gallon (Sans, IS Half-gallon  Cans, and  85 Q,uart  Cans?of  Olive  Oil.
Judgment   of   dismissal.     .Product   released   on   bond.?(F.   &   D.   No.
10901.    I. S. No. 2958-r.     S. No. W-455.)
On July 30, 1919, the United States attorney for the District of New Mexico,?
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 condemnation?
of 12 gallon cans, 18 half-gallon cans, and 85 quart cans of olive oil, consigned?
by A. Giurlani & Bros., San Francisco, Calif., remaining unsold in the original?
unbroken packages at Albuquerque, N. M., alleging that the article had been?
shipped May 21. 1919, and transported from the State of California into the
34	
BUREAU  OP   CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 102,
State of New Mexico, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation?
of the Food and Drugs Act.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in substance in the libel for the reason?
that Spanish olive oil had been substituted wholly or in part for Italian olive?
oil, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged in substance for the reason that the labels on the?
cans containing the article bore the following statements regarding the contents?
of said cans, to wit, " Olive Oil Superfine, Gaetano Giurlani Brand, Medaglie?
D'Oro Esposizioni Internaz Milano Torino, Olio Soprafino Puro D'Oliva Garan-?
tito Sotto Qualunque," which said statements were false and misleading and?
deceived and misled the purchaser into believing that the contents of said cans?
were pure Italian olive oil, whereas, in truth and in fact, the contents of the?
said cans were not pure Italian oil, but were Spanish olive oil.
On November 25, 1919, A. Giurlani & Bros., San Francisco, Calif., having?
entered an appearance as claimant of the goods and petitioned the court for?
a dismissal of the cause, and having paid the costs of the proceedings and?
executed bond in the sum of SI70.70, in conformity with section 10 of the act,?
it was ordered by the court that the libel be dismissed and that the goods be?
delivered to said claimant after they had been relabeled.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.