12437. Misbranding and alleged Adulteration of butter.    U. S. v. 29 Boxes j
of Butter.     Decree of condemnation and forfeiture.    Product re- s
leased under bond to be  reworked.     (F.  & D. No.  18486.    I.  S.  No. : 
2359-v.    S. No. E-4777.)
On March 11, 1924, the United States attorney for the Western District of i
New York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the I
District Court of the United States for said district a libel praying the seizure ;
and condemnation of 29 boxes of butter remaining in the original unbroken ;
packages at Buffalo, N. Y., consigned by the Sugar Creek Creamery, Danville, 
111., alleging that the article had been shipped from Danville, 111., February 21, 
1924, and transported from the State of Illinois into the State of New York, 
and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the food and drugs 
act as amended. A portion of the article was labeled, " 2 Pounds Net," and the 
remainder thereof was labeled, " 3 Pounds Net."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that a :
product deficient in butterfat and containing excessive moisture had been mixed *
and packed with and substituted wholly or in part for the said article, and for 
the further reason that a valuable constituent, butterfat, had been wholly or 
in part abstracted.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the article was an imitation of 
or offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article, and for the 
further reason that it was food in package form and the quantity of the con- 
tents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the packages, 
since the statement made was not correct. Misbranding was alleged for the 
further reason that the statement, "3 Pounds Net," was false and misleading 
and deceived and misled the purchaser.
On June 19, 1924, the Sugar Creek Creamery Co., Danville, Ill., having ap- 
peared as claimant for the property, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture 
was entered on the ground that the product was misbranded, and it was ordered 
by the court that the said product be released to the claimant upon payment of 
the costs of the proceedings and the execution of a bond in the sum of $200, 
in conformity with section 10 of the act, conditioned in part that it be reworked 
under the supervision of this department.
HOWARD M. GORE, Secretary of Agriculture.