1900. Adulteration and misbranding of paprika. U. S. v. 1 Bag of Paprika. De- 
fault decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 3855. Sample 
No. 46549-E.)
Examination showed that this product consisted essentially of corn meal with 
only a small quantity of ground paprika, and that it was contaminated with 
rodent hairs and insect fragments. Its label failed to comply with certain 
labeling requirements of the law as indicated below.
On February 21, 1941, the United States attorney for the Southern District of 
New York filed a libel against 1 bag of paprika at New York, N. Y., alleging that 
the article had been shipped on or about November 13, 1940, from Miami, Fla., 
by the C. A. Burnet Warehouse & TKans. Co. on order of Florida Food Sales; 
and charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. It was labeled in part: 
"Paprika Product of Cuba Net Weight 110 lbs."
The article was alleged to be adulterated (1) in that it consisted in whole or 
in part of a filthy substance; (2) in that a valuable constituent, paprika, had 
been in whole or in part omitted therefrom; (3) in that a substance, corn meal 
containing a small quantity of ground paprika, had been substituted wholly or in 
part for paprika; and (4) in that damage or inferiority had been concealed.
It was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the name "Paprika" was false 
and misleading as applied to corn meal containing a small quantity of ground 
paprika; (2) in that it was offered for sale under the name of another food; (3) 
in that it was an imitation of another food and its label failed to bear in type 
of uniform size and prominence the word "imitation" and, immediately thereafter, 
the name of the food imitated; (4) in that it was in package form and failed 
to bear a label containing the name and the place of business of the manufacturer, 
packer, or distributor; and (5) in that it was fabricated from two or more in- 
gredients and its label failed to bear the common or usual name of each ingredient.
On March 19, 1941, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation 
was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.