25281. Adulteration and misbranding of tomato paste and tomato puree, and
Misbranding of canned tomatoes. V. S. v. Uddo-Taormina Corpora- 
tion. Plea of guilty. Fine, $25. (F. & D. no. 34055. Sample nos. 
66522-A, 66523-A, 3976-B, 4122-B, 4124-B, 4125-B, 4187-B.)
This case involved canned tomatoes which were below standard and which 
were not labeled to indicate that fact, also canned tomato paste and tomato 
puree which were insufficiently concentrated.
On September 23, 1935, the United States attorney for the Southern Dis- 
trict of Mississippi, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed 
in the district court an information against the Uddo-Taormina Corporation, 
trading at Crystal Springs, Miss., alleging shipment by said company, in 
violation of the Food and Drugs Act as amended, on or about June 22 and July 
10, 1934, from the State of Mississippi into the State of Louisiana, of quan- 
tities of canned tomatoes which were misbranded; and on or about June 26, 
July 10, and July 11, 1934, from the State of Mississippi into the State of 
Louisiana, of quantities of tomato paste and tomato puree which were adul- 
terated and misbranded. The articles were labeled in part, variously: "Orla 
Brand * * * Tomatoes Distributed by Uddo-Taormina Corporation"; 
"Conco Brand Tomato Paste * * * Packed for Consolidated Companies 
Inc. Plaquemine, La."; "Buffalo Brand Tomato Puree • * * * Distributed by 
Uddo Taormina Corp. New Orleans, La."
The tomato paste and tomato puree were alleged to be adulterated in that 
insufficiently condensed, strained tomato products made in part from tomato 
trimmings had been substituted in whole or in part for tomato paste and 
tomato puree, which the articles purported to be.
Misbranding of the tomato paste and the tomato puree was alleged for the 
reason that the statements, "Tomato Paste", "Conserve Di Pomidoro", "To- 
mato Puree", and "Puree Di Pomidoro", borne on the labels, were false and
misleading and for the further reason that they were labeled so as to deceive ,; 
and mislead the purchaser, since the said statements represented that the 
articles consisted of tomato paste and tomato puree; whereas they did not 
so consist but did consist of insufficiently condensed, strained tomato products 
made in part from tomato trimmings. Misbranding of the tomato paste and 
tomato puree was alleged for the further reason that they were imitations 
of and were offered for sale under the distinctive names of other articles, 
namely, tomato paste and tomato puree.
Misbranding of the canned tomatoes was alleged for the reason that the 
article was canned food and fell below the standard of quality and condition 
promulgated by the Secretary of Agriculture, since its color was not the natu- 
rally developed red of the mature red fruit of the tomato vine, as prescribed by 
said standard, and since it contained peel in excess of the maximum permitted 
by said standard, and its package or label did not bear a plain and conspicuous 
statement prescribed by regulations of this Department indicating that it fell 
below such standard.
On November 5, 1935, a plea of guilty was entered on behalf of the defend- 
ant company, and the court imposed a fine of $25.
R. G. TITGWELL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.