11969. Adulteration and misbranding- of olive oil. U. S. v. Samuel Hoeh- 
neisser and Louis Weisbergr (Bay Bee Oil Co.). Pleas of 
guilty. Fine, flOO. (F. & D. No. 17526. I. S. Nos. 15555-t, 15610-t, 
15611-t,  15612-t, 15613-t,  15614-t,  15615-t, 15619-t, 15620-t.)
At the October, 1923, term of the United States District Court within and for 
the Southern District of New York, the United States attorney for said district, 
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the district court 
aforesaid an information against Samuel Hochheisser and Louis Weisberg, 
copartners, trading as the Bay Bee Oil Co., New York, N. Y., alleging shipment 
by said defendants, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, in 
various consignments, namely, on or about October 5, 1921, January 7, Janu- 
ary 16, February 6, and March 18, 1922, respectively, from the State of New 
York into the State of New Jersey, and on or about January 26, 1922, from the 
State of New Yoi*k into the State of Connecticut, of quantities of olive oil 
which was misbranded and quantities of alleged olive oil which was adulterated 
and misbranded. The olive oil was labeled in part: " Extra Sublime Pure 
Imported Olive Oil Blue Star Brand * * * One Gallon " (or " Half Gallon " 
or "Quarter Gallon") "* * * Bay Bee Oil Company Importers & Packer*- 
I.ucca, Italy. New York U. S. A." Some of the alleged gallon cans were 
further labeled, " 74 Lbs. Net Or 0.98 Of One Gallon," and some of the alleged 
half-gallon cans were further labeled, "3| Lbs. Net Or 0.98 Of Half Gallon." 
The Cob brand oil was labeled in part: " Olio Sopraffino Per Insalata ' Cob'
90486-24 2
Brand * * -" (picture of olive branches) "Extra Fine Corn Oil Blended 
With Highest Grade Pure Olive Oil * * * Net Contents One Gallon" (or 
" Net Contents Half Gallon " or " Net Contents One Quarter Gallon ") "* * * 
Packed By B B O C New York."
Analyses of samples of the Cob brand oil by the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department showed that it consisted of corn oil mixed with a small quantity 
of cottonseed oil. Examination of both brands of the article by said bureau 
showed that the cans contained less than the quantities declared on the labels 
thereof.
Adulteration was alleged in the information witli respect to the Cob brand oil 
for the reason that
" oil or oils other than olive oil had been substituted in 
whole or in part for olive oil, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to the said Cob brand oil for the reason 
that the statements in prominent type, to wit " Olio Sopraffino * * * Pure 
Olive Oil," together with the design and device of olive branches, borne on the 
cans containing the said article, were false and misleading in that they 
represented that the article was olive oil. and for the further reason that it was 
labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief 
that it was olive oil, whereas it was not olive oil but was a mixture composed 
in whole or in part of oil or oils other than olive oil. Misbranding was alleged 
for the further reason that the statement, to wit, " Blended With Highest Grade 
* * + Olive Oil," borne on the cans containing the said Cob brand oil, was 
false and misleading in that it represented that the article was blended with 
the highest grade olive oil, and for the further reason that it was labeled as 
aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it was 
blended with highest grade olive oil. wdiereas it was not blended with highest 
grade olive oil in that it was a product which contained no olive oil. Mis- 
branding was alleged for the further reason that the article was a product com- 
posed in whole or in part of oil or oils other than olive oil and contained no 
flavor of olive oil, prepared in imitation of and offered for sale and sold under 
the distinctive name of another article, to wit, olive oil.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to both brands of the article for the 
reason that the statements, " One Gallon," " Net Contents One Gallon," " Net 
Contents Half Gallon," " Net Contents One Quarter Gallon," and " Quarter 
Gallon," borne on the respective-sized cans containing the said article, and the 
further statement, to wit, " 3f Lbs. Net Or 0.98 Of Half Gallon," borne on 
certain of the alleged half-gallon cans, and the further statement, to wit, " 7J 
Lbs. Net Or 0.98 Of One Gallon," borne on certain of the alleged gallon cans, 
were false and misleading in that the said statements represented that the 
cans contained one gallon, one-half gallon, or one-quarter gallon of the article, 
as the case might be, and that certain of the alleged half-gallon cans contained 
3f pounds, or 0.98 of a half gallon, and that certain of the alleged gallon cans 
contained 7i pounds, or 0.98 of one gallon, and for the further reason that the 
article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into 
the belief that the said cans contained the amounts declared on the respective 
labels, whereas, in truth and in fact, they did not but did contain less amounts. 
Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the article was food in 
package form and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously 
marked on the outside of the package.
On October 22, 1923, the defendants entered pleas of guilty to the information, 
and the court imposed a fine of $100.
C. F. MARVIN. Acting Secretary of Agriculture.