12289. Adulteration   and   misbranding   of   canned   salmon.     U.   S.   v.   521
Cases, et al., of Sainton. Consent decrees of condemnation and 
forfeiture. Product released under bond. (F. & D. Nos. 17753, 
17761, 18016. I. S. Nos. 11485-v, 11490^-v, 20687-v. S. Nos. W-1411, 
W-1414, W-1438.)
On August 31, September 5, and November 15, 1923, respectively, the United 
States attorney for the Western District of Washington, acting upon reports 
by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the district court of the United States 
for said district libels praying the seizure and condemnation of 1,274 cases of 
salmon, remaining in the original unbroken packages at Seattle, Wash., alleg- 
ing that the article had been shipped by the F. C. Barnes Co., from Lake Bay, 
Alaska, in part August 14 and in part September 29, 1923, and transported 
from the Territory of Alaska into the State of Washington, and charging 
adulteration with respect to a portion of the article, and adulteration and 
misbranding with respect to the remainder thereof, in violation of the food 
and drug's act. One lot of the product consigned August 14 was labeled in 
part: (Case) "Dollar Brand Fancy Salmon Packed in Alaska for F. C. 
Barries Co., Portland, Ore. * * *." The remaining lot, consigned August 14, 
was labeled in part: (Can) " Red Seal Brand * * * Salmon." The lot con- 
signed September 29 was labeled in part: (Case) "Defender Brand Red Cohoe 
Salmon, fine quality packed by F. C. Barnes Co., Portland, Oregon, at Lakebay, 
Alaska;"   (can)   "Defender    *    *    *    Brand  Red   Cohoe    *    *    *    Salmon."
Adulteration was alleged with respect to the product involved in all the 
consignments for the reason that it consisted wholly or in part of a filthy, 
decomposed, and putrid animal substance.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to the product consigned September 
29 for the reason that the word, " Red," appearing on the label was false and 
misleading and deceived and misled the purchaser, since the article was not 
red salmon. Misbranding was alleged for the further/reason that the article 
was offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article.
On February 13, 1924, the F. C. Barnes Co., claimant, having admitted the 
allegations of the libels and 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 claimant upon payment of the costs 
of the proceedings and the execution of bonds in the aggregate sum of $3,000, 
in conformity with section 10 of the act, conditioned in part that it be sorted 
under the supervision of this department and the bad portion destroyed.
HOWLED M. GOEE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.