11427.?Adulteration   and   misbranding   of   cottonseed   meal.    U.   S.   v.   143
Sacks of Cottonseed Meal. Consent decree providing for release?
of the product under bond. (F. & D. No. 17173. I S. No. 1296-v.?
S. No. E-4282.)
On January 20, 1922, 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 praying the seizure and?
condemnation of 143 sacks of cottonseed meal, remaining in the original?
unbroken packages at Boyds, Md., consigned on or about December 4, 1922,?
alleging that the article had been shipped by the Eastern Cotton Oil Co., from?
Richmond, Va., and transported from the State of Virginia into the State?
of Maryland, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of?
the Food and Drugs Act. The article was labeled in part: " Perfection Cotton?
Seed Meal 100 Lbs. Net Manufactured By Eastern Cotton Oil Company?
Edenton, N. C."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in. the libel for the reason that a?
substance low in protein, ammonia, had been mixed and packed with and sub??
stituted in whole or in part for the said article.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements borne on the?
sacks containing the article, " Perfection Cotton Seed Meal * * * Guar??
antee Protein not less than 41.00? Equivalent to Ammonia 8.00? * * *?
Ingredients?Made from Upland Cotton Seed," were false and misleading and?
deceived and misled the purchaser. Misbranding was alleged for the further?
reason that the article was an imitation of and was offered for sale under the?
distinctive name of another article.
On February 28, 1923, 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. Thereafter?
Gambrill & Carlin, Inc., Boyds, Md., having intervened as claimant in the?
interest of the Eastern Cotton Oil Co., Edenton, N. C, and having admitted?
the allegations of the libel with respect to the misbranding of the product?
and having alleged that the misbranding was the result of a mistake, judg??
ment of the court was entered ordering that the product be released to the?
said claimant upon payment of the costs of the proceedings and the execution
N. J. 11401-11450.] SERVICE AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	225
of a bond in the sum of $1,000, in conformity with section 10 of the act, con??
ditioned in part that it be properly branded under the supervision of this?
department and that the order previously entered for the destruction of the?
product be rescinded.
C. F. MABVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.