11137.?Adulteration, and misbranding- of olive oil.    U. S. v. 5 1-Gallon Cans
and 4 5-Gallon Cans of Olive Oil. Default decree of condemna??
tion,   forfeiture,   and   destruction.     (F.   &   D.   No.   16593.    I.   S.   No.
18425-t.    S. No. C-3678.)
On July 7, 1922, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Mis??
souri, 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 condem??
nation of 5 1-gallon cans and 4 5-gallon cans of olive oil, remaining in the?
original unbroken packages at St. Louis, Mo., alleging that the article had been?
shipped by the Messina Importing Co., New York, N. Y., on or about June 13,?
1922, and transported from the State of New York into the State of Missouri,?
and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs?
Act,   as  amended.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that cotton??
seed oil had been mixed and packed with and substituted wholly or in part for?
olive oil.
Misbranding was alleged,in substance for the reason that the following state??
ments appearing on the labels of the gallon cans, to wit, " Olio Puro D'Oliva?
Garantito Messina Brand Extra Fine Quality Packed and Importe
d by Messina?
Imp. Co. New York, N. Y. This can contains one gallon * *~ * Messina?
Brand Olio Puro D'Oliva. This oil is absolutely pure extracted from olives?
and unsurpassable for table and medicinal use. It is guaranteed under any?
analysis in strict accordance with laws covering imported products," together?
with equivalent statements in Italian, were false and misleading and deceived?
and misled the purchaser, and for the further reason that the article was [food]?
in package form, and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and con??
spicuously marked on the outside of the package. Misbranding was alleged,?
with respect to the product in the cans of both sizes, for the reason that it was?
an imitation of and was offered for sale under the distinctive name of another?
article.
On September 20, 1922, no claimant having appeared for the property, judg??
ment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the?
court that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
C. W. PXJGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.