13073. Adulteration and misbranding? of butter.    V. S. v. 25 Cases of But 
ter.     Decree  of  condemnation  and  forfeiture.    Product  released 
under bond.     (F. & D. No. 16788.    I. S. No. 3075-v.     S. No. E-4160.)
On September 6, 1922, the United States attorney for the Southern District 
of Georgia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of the United States for said district a libel praying the seizure 
and condemnation of 25 cases of butter, remaining unsold in the original pack- 
ages at Savannah, Ga., alleging that the article had been shipped by the Union 
Springs Creamery, Union Springs, Ala., on or about August 22, 1922, and trans- 
ported from the State of Alabama into the State of Georgia, arid charging 
adulteration and misbranding in violation of the food and drugs act. The 
article was labeled in part: " Pure Creamery Butter One Pound."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that a sub- 
stance, to wit, excessive moisture, had been mixed and packed therewith so as 
to reduce and lower and injuriously affect its quality and had been substituted 
in whole or in part for butter, which the said article purported to be. Adul- 
teration was alleged for the further reason that a valuable constituent of the 
article to wit, butterfat, had been in whole or in part abstracted therefrom.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that iihe packages or labels bore a 
statement, to wit, " Pure Creamery Butter One Pound," which was false and 
misleading and deceived and misled the purchaser, for the further reason that 
it was an imitation of and offered for sale under the distinctive name of an- 
other article, and for the further reason that it was food in package form and 
the quantity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the 
outside of the packages, since the statement on the said packages, to wit, " One 
Pound," was incorrect.
On September 29, 1922, the Union Springs Creamery, Union Springs, Ala., 
having appeared as claimant for the property, judgment of condemnation was 
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 a good and sufficient bond, in conformity with section 10 of the act, and it 
was further ordered that the product be reworked and relabeled in compliance 
with law. 
/
R. W. DTJNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.