20302. Adulteration and Misbranding of rye flour.   U.S. v. 93 Sacks of Rye
Flour, et al. Consent decrees of condemnation and forfeiture. 
Product released under bond to be relabeled. (F. & D. nos. 28940, 
28942.    Sample nos. 10890-A, 10892-A.)
These actions involved the interstate shipment of quantities of a product 
sold as rye flour1, which was found, to be an artificially bleached rye flour, 
containing benzoyl peroxide or its residue, benzoic acid.
On September 22 and September 23, 1932, the United States attorney for 
the Southern District of New York, acting upon reports by the Secretary of 
Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for the district 
aforesaid libels praying seizure and condemnation of 436 sacks of rye flour 
at New York, N.Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in* interstate 
commerce, by the Wisconsin Milling Co., from Menomonie, Wis., in part on or 
about August 19, 1932, and in part on or about September 2, 1932, and had 
been transported from the State of Wisconsin into the State of New York, and 
charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act. 
A portion of the article was labeled: (Sack) "Rye Flour * * * Pride of 
Wisconsin, High Grade, Guaranteed Pure Patent White Rye, Wisconsin Milling 
Co., Menomonie, Wis." The remainder was labeled: (Sack) " Riverdale White 
Patent Rye Flour Golden Grain Products Co., New York, N.Y., Distributors."
Adulteration was alleged in the libel filed, with respect to a portion of the 
article for the reason that artificially bleached rye flour had been substituted 
for white rye flour. Adulteration was alleged with respect to the remainder 
of the article for the reason that artificially bleached rye flour containing ben- 
zoyl peroxide or its residue, benzoic acid, had been substituted for rye flour.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to both lots of the product for the rea- 
son that the statements on the sacks, " Pure Patent White Rye " and " White 
Patent Rye Flour", were false and misleading and deceived and misled the 
purchaser, when applied to an artificially bleached flour. Misbranding was 
alleged for the further reason that the article was offered for sale under the 
distinctive name of another article.
David Coleman, New York, N.Y., interposed a claim for the property as 
agent for the Wisconsin Milling Co., Menomonie, Wis., admitted the allegations 
of the libels, and consented to the entry of decrees. On October 6, 1932, judg- 
ments 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 costs 
and the execution of bonds in the total sum of $1,300, conditioned in part that 
it be relabeled, under the supervision of this Department, by stenciling the 
words " Bleached with Benzoyl Peroxide " on the sacks.
R. G. TUGWELL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.