27151. Adulteration and misbranding of butter.    U. S. v. Davls-Cleaver Produce
Co. Plea of guilty. Fine, $350 and costs. (F. & D. no. 33900. Sam- 
ple nos. 58201-A, 58202-A, 58490-A, 58492-A, 58493-A, 58506-A, 58507-A, 
58508-A, 59248-A, 66049-A, 66125-A, 13505-B.)
This case involved interstate shipments of butter that was deficient in milk 
fat, and a portion of which was short in weight.
On March 27, 1935, the United States attorney for the Southern District of 
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court an information against the Davis-Oleaver Produce Co., a corpora- 
tion of Quincy, Ill., alleging shipment by said company in violation of the 
Food and Drugs Act between the dates of May 23, 1933, and August 22, 1934, 
from the State of Illinois into the States of Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, 
Missouri, and New York of quantities of butter that was adulterated and a 
portion of which was misbranded. Certain lots were labeled variously: 
"Country Roll * * * I G A Brand Butter * * * Packed for Independ- 
ent Grocers Alliance Distributing Co. Chicago, Illinois"; "Red Oak Brand 
Butter"; "Fancy Roll Butter, Ferndale Country Roll * * * Packed ex- 
pressly for Charles Abrams & Sons, Long Island City"; "Ferndale Creamery 
Butter manufactured by Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., Quincy, Illinois * * * 
One Pound net weight"
The article was alleged to be adulterated in that a product that contained less 
than 80 percent by weight of milk fat had been substituted for butter, n 
product which must contain not less than 80 percent by weight of milk fat 
as defined by the act of Congress of March 4, 1923, which the article purported 
to be.
Portions of the article were alleged to be misbranded in that the statement 
"butter", borne on the packages, was false and misleading since it represented 
that the article was butter as defined by law; whereas it was a product 
deficient in milk fat in that it contained less than 80 percent by weight of 
milk fat; and in that it was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead 
the purchaser. One lot was alleged to be misbranded further in that the 
statement "One Pound Net Weight", borne on the carton, was false and mis- 
leading and was borne on said carton so as to deceive and mislead the pur- 
chaser since the carton contained less than 1 pound; and in that it was food 
in package form and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and con- 
spicuously marked on the outside of the package, since the statement made 
was incorrect
On April 9, 1937, a plea of guilty was entered on behalf of the defendant 
and the court imposed a fine of $350 and costs.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
27152. Sllsbrandlns' of  olive oil.     TJ.  S.   v. Joltn  Montecalvo.     Plea  of guilty.
Fine, $50.    (F. & D. no. 35882.   Sample no. 25869-B.)
This product was represented to be imported olive oil. Examination showed 
that it consisted chiefly, if not wholly, of domestic cottonseed oil.
On August 11, 1936, the United States attorney for the District of Rhode 
Island, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
11142*—87 1 
67
district court an information against John Montecalvo, Providence, R. I.f 
alleging shipment by said defendant in violation of the Food and Drugs Act 
on or about January 18. 1935, from the State of Rhode Island into the State 
of Massachusetts of a quantity of alleged olive oil that was misbranded. The 
article was labeled in part: "Imported from Italy * * * Vieste Gargano 
brand Pure Olive Oil Prodotto ii Vieste-Italia Impaccato dai Vieste Gargano 
Co."
It was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements, "Vieste Gargano 
* * * Pure Olive Oil", "Olio Puro Di Oliva", "Prodotto Di Vieste-Italia 
Impaccato dai Vieete Gargano Co.", "The Olive Oil Contained in this Can is 
of Finest Quality & Guaranteed Absolutely Pure under Chemical Analysis", 
"Ohio Di Oliva Impaccato In Questa Latta E' Garantito Puro Sotto Analysis 
Chimica", and "Imported from Italy", together with designs showing olive 
branches bearing olives, borne on the cans containing the article, were false 
and misleading and were borne on the cans so as to deceive and mislead the 
purchaser, since they represented that the article was pure olive oil produced 
in and imported from Italy: whereas it was not pure olive oil produced in and 
imported from Italy but was a domestic product consisting chiefly, if not 
wholly, of cottonseed oil. The article was alleged to be misbranded further 
in that it was offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article, 
olive oil.
On September 4, 1936, a plea of guilty was entered and the court imposed a 
fine of $50.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.