8929. Adulteration and misbranding of nonalcoholic beverages. U. S.?
+ * * v. 2 Kegs * * * of Nonalcoholic Beverages Labeled in?
Part, " Nonalcoholic Artificial Flavor and Color (Blaelcbei-ry Cor??
dial) (Cherry Cordial) Flavor Sweetened with Saccharine." De??
fault decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. &?
D. No. 13975.    I. S. Nos. 8140-t, S44L-1.    S. No. E-2898.)
On November 29, 1920, the United States attorney for the District of Mary??
land, 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 2 kegs of nonalcoholic beverages, labeled in part " Non-alcoholic?
Artificial Flavor and Color Blackberry Cordial (Cherry Cordial) Flavor sweet??
ened with saccharine * * * Red Cross Mfg. Co. St. Louis, Mo.," remaining?
in the original unbroken packages at Colgate, Md., alleging that the article?
had been shipped by the Red Cross Mfg. Co., St. Louis, Mo., and transported?
from the Slate of Missouri into the State of Maryland, and charging adultera??
te n and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act.
N.J. 8001-8050.]        SERVICE AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.      301
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that?
saccharin 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 the article. Adulteration was alleged for the further reason that the?
article contained an added poisonous or deleterious ingredient, saccharin,?
which might render the article injurious to health, and for the further reason?
that said article was colored in a manner whereby its inferiority was concealed.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the package or label of the?
article bore statements, designs, or devices regarding the article or the ingre??
dients and substances contained therein, to wit, " Non-alcoholic Artificial?
Flavor and Color Blackberry Cordial" (or "Cherry Cordial") "Flavor sweet??
ened with saccharine * * * guarantee * * *," which were false and mis??
leading, and deceived and misled the purchaser. Misbranding was alleged for?
the further reason that said article was an imitation of, and was offered for?
sale under the distinctive name of, another article.
On January 5, 1921, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment?
of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court?
that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.