11508. Adulteration and misbranding; of fruit emulsions. TT. S. v. 3 1-Gal-?
lon Cans Containing;, Respectively, Cherry, Raspberry, and?
Strawbei-ry Emulsions, So-Called. Default decree of condemna??
tion, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. & D. No. 16199. S. No.?
E-3899.)
On June 16, 1922, the United States attorney for the District of New?
Jersey, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis??
trict Court of the United States for said district a libel praying the seizure?
and condemnation of 3 1-gallon cans containing, respectively, cherry, rasp??
berry, and strawberry emulsions, alleging that the articles had been shipped by?
the Caro Flavoring Co., Washington, D. C, or about April 17, 1922, and trans??
ported from the District of Columbia into the State of New Jersey, and charg??
ing adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act.?
The articles were labeled in part, respectively: " Caro Flavoring Co. H. &?
H. Brand One Gallon Cherry Emulsion We guarantee the flavor of this?
Emulsion consists of 95? true fruit concentration & 5? artificial flavoring?
and fruit acid. * * * Factory 1530 Seventh St., N. W., Washington, D.?
C. Shake Well. Artificially Colored; " " Caro Flavoring Co. H. & H. Brand?
One Gallon Raspberry" (or "Strawberry") "Emulsion * * * Part pure?
& part artificial coloring & fruit acid.    *    *    *    Artificially Colored."
Adulteration of the articles was alleged in substance in the libel for the?
reason that a substance, to wit, an imitation fruit emulsion consisting chiefly?
of citric acid, gum, and glycerin, strongly colored with coal-tar dyes and?
flavored with synthetic esters, having practically no suggestion of the flavor?
of the fruit named on the respective can labels, had been mixed and paeked?
therewith so as to reduce and lower and injuriously affect their quality and?
strength and had been substituted wholly or in part for cherry, raspberry,?
and strawberry fruit emulsions, respectively, which the said articles pur??
ported to be. Adulteration was alleged for the further reason that the articles?
were mixed, colored, and stained with citric acid, gum, glycerin, coal-tar?
dyes, and synthetic esters in a manner whereby damage and inferiority were?
?concealed.
N.J. 11501-11550.J SEKVICE AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	277
Misbranding of the articles was alleged in substance for the reason that?
the statements, to wit,  "Cherry Emulsion    We guarantee the flavor of this?
Emulsion consists of 95?  true fruit concentration & 5?  artificial flavoring?
<fc  fruit  acid,"   " Raspberry   Emulsion    *    *    *    Part  pure  &  part   artificial?
coloring  &  fruit  acid,"   and   " Strawberry  Emulsion    *    *    *    Part   pure   &?
part artificial coloring & fruit acid," appearing on the respective labels of the?
said articles, regarding the articles, were false and misleading in that the said?
statements represented that the so-called cherry emulsion was an emulsion com??
posed of cherry fruit and the juice of cherries and that 95 per cent of the flavor??
ing consisted of true fruit concentration, that the so-called raspberry emulsion?
was an emulsion composed of raspberry fruit and the juice of raspberries and?
containing part pure and part  artificial coloring and fruit acid,  and that?
the so-called strawberry emulsion was an emulsion composed chiefly of straw??
berry fruit and the juice of strawberries and containing part pure and part?
artificial coloring and fruit acid, and for the further reason that the articles?
were labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser thereof?
into the belief that the so-called cherry emulsion was composed chiefly of cherry?
fruit and the juice of cherries with a guaranteed flavor consisting of 95 per?
cent of fruit concentration, that the so-called raspberry emulsion was com??
posed chiefly of raspberry fruit and natural coloring and acid of raspberry?
fruit,  and that the so-called strawberry emulsion  was composed chiefly of?
strawberry fruit and natural coloring and acid of strawberry fruit, whereas,?
in truth and in facj, the said articles were not cherry, raspberry, and straw??
berry emulsions composed chiefly of cherry, raspberry, and strawberry fruit?
and juice, as the case might be, the flavor of the so-called cherry* emulsion?
did not consist of 95 per cent of true fruit concentration, and the so-called?
raspberry and strawberry emulsions contained little, if any, true coloring and?
acids of said fruits, but the said cherry emulsion was a sirupy liquid consisting?
principally of citric acid, gum, and glycerin, colored intensely red with coal-tar?
dye and having a rank odor and flavor which in no wise simulated cherry,?
and it contained little,  if any, true fruit or juice of cherries,  the so-called?
raspberry emulsion was a liquid containing chiefly citiric acid, glycerin, and?
gum,  colored intensely red with coal-tar dye, with a strong odor suggesting?
synthetic esters, and practically all the color was due to coal-tar dye, and?
the so-called strawberry emulsion was a liquid containing chiefly citric acid?
and glycerin, colored intensely red with coal-tar dye and leaving a prevailing?
odor  like  synthetic  esters  which  in  no  way  resembles  the  aroma of straw??
berries, and practically all the color was due to coal-tar dye.    Misbranding?
was alleged for tlie further reason that the articles were imitations of and?
offered for sale under the distinctive names of other articles, to wit, cherry?
emulsion, raspberry emulsion, and strawberry emulsion, respectively.
On June 11, 1923, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment?
of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court?
that the products be destroyed by the United States marshal.
HOWABP M. GoTiE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture