SSS5. Adulteration and misbranding' of gray shorts. U. S. * * * v. 500?
Sacks   of   Alleged   Gray   Shorts.     Consent   decree   of   condemnation
and  forfeiture.     Product  released  under  bond.     (F.   &  D.   No.   12810.?
I. S. No.  114-r.     S. No. E-2319.)
On June 3, 1920, the United States attorney for the Southern District of?
Georgia, acting upon a report by the Secretly of Agriculture, filed in the Dis??
trict Court of the United States for said district a libel for the seizure and?
condemnation of 500 sacks of alleged gray shorts, remaining unsold in the?
original unbroken packages, at Brunswick, Ga., alleging that the article had?
been shipped on or about May 4, 1920, by the Gateway Milling Co.. Kansas City,?
Mo., and transported from the State of Missouri into the State of Georgia, and?
charging adulteration and misbranding under the Food and Drugs Act. The?
article was labeled in part, " Mfg. by Gateway Milling Co. Kansas City, Mo.?
Gray Shorts Red Dog Flour Pulverized Wheat Bran 100 lbs. Net. Guaranteed?
Analysis Protein, not less than 15.00?, Fat, not less than 3.50?, Crude Fibre,?
not more than 10.00?, Carbohydrates (Nitrogen free extract), not less than?
52.50?."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment show that it contained rice hulls, 3.34 per cent of fat, and 11.90 per??
cent of crude fiber.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that ground?
rice hulls had been mixed and packed with the article, and had been substituted?
wholly or in part therefor.
Misbranding of the article was alleged for the reason that the statements?
on the labels of the said sacks, " Gray Shorts * * * Red Dog Flour * * *?
Pulverized Wheat Bran * * * Fat, not less than 3.50?. Crude Fibre, not?
more than 10.00?," were false and misleading and the article was labeled so?
as to deceive and mislead the purchaser. Misbranding was alleged for the?
further reason that the article was an imitation of, and was offered for sale?
nnder the distinctive name of, another article, to wit, gray shorts.
On August 23, 1920, the Gateway Milling Co., Kansas City, Mo., having filed?
an answer and consented to a decree, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture?
was entered, and it was ordered by the court that the product be released to
232	
BUREAU  OF  CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 107,
said claimant upon the payment of the costs of the proceedings and the execu??
tion of a bond, in conformity with section 10 of the act, conditioned in part?
that the product be relabeled for reshipment to Kansas City, Mo.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.