11100. Adulteration and misbranding of kidney beans. U. S. v. 90 Cases,?
et al, of Kidney Beans. Consent decrees of condemnation and?
forfeiture. A portion of tbe product ordered released under?
bond and the remainder destroyed. (F. & D. Nos. 12178, 12179, 12180.?
12181, 12235. I. S. Nos. 7353-r, 7354-r, 7355-r. 7356-r, 7357-r, 12468-r.?
S. Nos. C-1758, C-1759, O-1760, C-1761, C-1762, C-1817.)
On February 19 and March 5, 1920, respectively, the United States attorney?
for the Southern District of Ohio, acting upon reports by the Secretary of?
Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said district?
libels for the seizure and condemnation of 351 cases of kidney beans, remaining?
unsold in part at Dayton and in part at Greenville, Ohio, consigned by the?
George Van Camp & Sons Co., Westfield, Ind., between the dates of November?
4, 1919, and January 23, 1920, alleg'ng that the article had been shipped from?
WesJ field, Ind
, and transported from the State of Indiana into the State of?
Ohio, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and
54	
BUREAU  OF  CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 152.
Drugs Act    The article was labeled in part:    " Geo.  Van  Camp's  Special?
Red Kidney Beans Packed By Geo. Van Camp & Sons Co. Westfleld, Ind."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libels for (he reason that long?
cranberry beans had been mixed and packed with and substituted wholly or in?
part for the said article.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement appearing on the?
label, "' Red Kidney Beans," was false and misleading and deceived and misled?
the purchaser when applied to long cranberry beans. Misbranding was alleged?
for the further reason that the article was an imitation of and was sold under?
the distinctive name of another article.
On December 31, 192:1, and October 28, 1922, respectively, the George Van?
Camp & Sons Co., Westfield, Ind., claimant, having admit*ed the allegations of?
the libels and consented to the entry of decrees, judgments of condemnation?
and forfeiture were entered, and it was ordered by the court that 340 cases of?
the product be released to the said claimant upon payment of the costs of the?
proceedings and the execution of bonds in the aggregate sum of $400, in con??
formity with section 10 of the act, conditioned in part that it be relabeled under?
the supervision of this department, and that 11 cases of the said product be?
destroyed by the United States marshal.
O. F. MAKVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
b. K A.—Cltem. Suppl. 153.