18702. Adulteration and alleged Misbranding of butter. V. S. v. 6 Cases, 
et al., of Butter. Consent decrees of condemnation and forfeiture. 
Product released under bond. (F. & D. No. 26763. I. S. Nos. 22159, 
22160, 22161, 22162.    S. No. 4757.)
Samples taken from various lots of butter which had been delivered to the 
pier at Seattle, Wash., for shipment to Alaska having been found to be deficient 
in milk fat and short of the declared weight, the Secretary of Agriculture 
reported the matter to the United States attorney for the Western District of 
Washingon.
On May 23, 1931, the United States attorney filed in the District Court of the
"United States for the district aforesaid libels praying seizure and condemnation
of 12 cases and 19 pounds of butter, alleging that the Centralia Dairy Co.
delivered the article on May 21, 1931, for shipment in interstate commerce from
Centralia, Wash., to Alaska, in part consigned to Ketchikan, Alaska, and in
part consigned to Juneau, Alaska, and charging adulteration and misbranding in
violation of the food and drugs act as amended.   The article was labeled in
part  variously:   (Cartons)   "Sunset Gold  Creamery  Butter      *   *   *    One
Pound Net; " " Medo-Maid Butter One Pound Net Weight.   Medo-Maid Butter
is made and guaranteed by Centralia Dairy Co., Centralia, Wash."   Portions
of the Medo-Maid butter consisted of prints labeled " Net Weight Four Ounces."
It was alleged in the libels that the article was adulterated in that a product
* containing less than 80 per cent by weight of milk fat had been substituted
for butter, a product which should contain not less than 80 per cent of milk
fat as provided by act of Congress of March 4, 1923.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the article was labeled butter, 
which was false and misleading, since it contained less than 80 per cent of 
milk fat, it was labeled "One Pound Net," "One Pound Net Weight," or 
" Net Weight Four Ounces," as the case might be, which statements were false 
and misleading, since the packages contained less than the declared quantity. 
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 packages, since the quantity stated on the packages 
was not correct.
On June 22, 1931, the Centralia Dairy Co., Centralia, Wash., claimant, having 
admitted the allegations of the libels and having consented to the entry of a 
decree, judgment was entered finding the product adulterated and ordering 
that it be condemned and forfeited, and it was further ordered by the court 
that the product be released to the said claimant upon payment of costs and the 
filing of cash bonds totaling $200, conditioned in part that it be brought into 
conformity with the Federal food and drugs act under the supervision of this 
department.
ABTHTCTB M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.