2081. Adulteration   and misbranding of  olive   infused  salad  oil.     Uğ S.  v.  700
Cases of Salad Oil. Consent decree of condemnation. Product ordered 
released under bond for relabeling. (F. D. C. No. 3942. Sample No. 
46486-E.)
This product consisted essentially of corn oil with a sufficient infusion of olives 
to simulate the flavor and appearance of olive oil. It also contained benzalde- 
hyde, and apricot, or other kernel, oil.
On March 10, 1941, the United States attorney for the Southern District of 
New York filed a libel against 700 cases of salad oil at New York, N. Y., alleging 
that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about January 
80,vl941, by American Maize Products Co. from North Hammond, Ind.; and 
charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in 
part: (Cans) "One Gallon net Ricola Pure Olive Infused Salad Oil."
The article was alleged to be adulterated in that a product containing benzalde- 
hyde and apricot or other kernel oil had been substituted wholly or in part for 
"Pure Corn oil specially processed with genuine selected imported olives," which 
it purported to be.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the following statements were 
false and misleading: "Pure Olive Infused Salad Oil Pure Corn Oil Specially 
Processed with Genuine Selected Imported Olives to Develop Fine Olive Flavor. 
This specially processed corn oil contains the natural flavor of the finest imported 
olives, and is a delicious oil for salads and salad dressings. Do not confuse 
Ricola with ordinary 'Blended' or 'compound' oils! Ricola is made under a 
patented process by Infusion of corn oil with selected imported olives so that 
the natural olive flavor is imparted to the oil. Ricola is guaranteed absolutely 
pure and wholesome. [Similar statements in Italian] We guarantee Ricola Oil 
to be absolutely pure and wholesome and to comply with all pure food laws 
throughout the world."
The article was alleged to be misbranded further in that it was an imitation 
of another food and its label failed to bear, in type of uniform size and promi- 
nence, the word "imitation" and, immediately thereafter, the name of the food 
imitated; and in that the label contained representations in a foreign language 
(Italian) and the information required by the act to appear on the label did 
not so appear in the foreign language.
On April 24, 1941, Musher & Co., Inc., claimant, having admitted the allega- 
tions of the libel, judgment of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that 
the product be released under bond conditioned on its being properly relabeled.