12251. Adulteration and misbi-andini^ of assorted jellies. V. S. v. 209 
Cases and 68 Cases of Assorted Jelly. Consent decrees of con- 
demnation  and  forfeiture.     Product  released  under  bond.     (F.  &
D. Nos. 17737, 17750. I. S. Nos. 4568-v, 4569-v, 4570-v, 4571-v, 4572-v, 
4573-v, 4574-v, 4575-v, 4776-v, 4777-v, 4778-v, 4779-v. S. Nos. C-4008. 
C-4009.)
On August 22 and 28, 1923, respectively, the United States attorney for 
the Southern District of Ohio, acting upon reports by the Secretary of Agri- 
culture, filed in the district court of the United States for said district libels 
praying the seizure and condemnation of 277 cases of assorted jellies, ?t 
Cincinnati, Ohio, consigned by the Paul De Laney Co. (Inc.), Brocton, N. Y., 
in part May 17, 1923, and in part May 21, 1923, alleging that the article had 
been shipped from Brocton, N. Y., and transported from the State of New 
York into the State of Ohio, and charging adulteration and misbranding in 
violation of the food and drugs act. A portion of the article was labeled 
in part: " Delco Brand Pure Apple Jelly Packed By The Paul DeLaney Co. 
Inc. Brocton, N. Y." The remainder of the article was labeled in part: 
"Delco Brand Pure fruit Jelly Grape-Apple" (or " Cherry-Apple," or "Straw- 
berry-Apple," or " Blackberry-Apple," or " Currant-Apple," or " Raspherry- 
Apple ") Packed By The Paul DeLaney Co. Inc.    Brocton, N. Y."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libels for the reason thai 
imitation jelly had been mixed and packed with and substituted wholly an<J 
in part for fruit jelly.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements on the re- 
spective labels, " Pure Fruit Jelly Strawberry-Apple," " Grape-Apple," 
" Cherry-Apple," " Blackbenr-Apple," "Currant-Apple," "Raspberry-Apple," 
" Pure Apple Jelly," and " Pure Fruit Jelly Strawberry-Apple," " Pure Fruit 
Jelly Currant-Apple," " Pure Fruit Jelly Raspberry-Apple," " Pure Fruit Jelly 
Cherry-Apple," and " Pure Apple Jelly," as the case might be, 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 offered f<?r 
sale under the distinctive name of another article, to wit, pure fruit jelly.
On January 10, 1924, the Paul DeLaney Co., Brocton, N. Y., claimant, 
having admitted the allegations of the libels and having consented to the 
entry of decrees, judgments of condemnation and forfeiture were entered, 
and it was ordered by the court that the product be released to the said claim- 
ant upon paymentof the costs of the proceedings and the execution of "bonds 
in the aggregate sum of $2,000, in conformity with section 10 of the act, con- 
ditioned in part that it be relabeled under the supervision of this department
HOWARD M. GOBB, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.