NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 2238.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Food and Drugs Act.)
ALLEGED MISBRANDING OF ITALIAN CHOCOLATES.
At a stated term of the District Court of the United States for 
the Northern District of California
,
begun and holden at San Fran- 
cisco, Cal., on the second Monday of July, 1910, the grand jurors of 
the United States within and for said district, acting upon a report 
of the Secretary of Agriculture, returned an indictment against the 
D. Ghirardelli Co., a corporation, San Francisco, Cal., alleging the 
sale by said defendant, under a written guaranty, on October 8, 1909, 
for interstate shipment, a quantity of Ghirardelli's Italian Choco- 
lates, which the indictment charged to have been misbranded in vio- 
lation of the Food and Drugs Act; and said product without having 
been changed in any particular was shipped by the purchaser thereof; 
on October 9, 1909, from the State of California into the State of 
Nevada. The product was labeled: " Ghirardelli's Italian Choco- 
lates, D. Ghirardelli Company, San Francisco, California."
An examination of a sample of the product by the Bureau of 
Chemistry of this Department showed that the box thereof was done 
in colors and design of the Italian flag, except that the crown above 
the shield was not used. The box was filled with a variety of shapes 
of chocolate candies wrapped in various colored tin foil, similar in 
style to Italian chocolate candies imported at San Francisco. Tests 
for presence of lead in the foil negative. Misbranding of the product 
was charged in the indictment for the reason that each box was so 
labeled as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that 
he was buying, and that the product was in fact, a foreign product, 
for the reason that each box thereof contained the words in large 
letters, " Italian Chocolates," and was so labeled as to imitate the 
colors of the Italian flag, and to give the package the semblance and
76651°—No. 2238—13
appearance of having been manufactured in Italy, whereas in truth 
and in fact it was a domestic product, manufactured by said defend- 
ant in San Francisco, Cal., and was not in fact genuine Italian 
chocolates.
On September 24, 1912, the case having come on for trial before 
the court and a jury a verdict of not guilty was returned hj the jury. 
The following charge was delivered to the jury by the court:
GENTLEMEN : As I have said several times during the progress of the trial, 
the case lies within a very narrow compass; and it will really depend upon 
your answer to the question, whether or not that label is calculated to deceive 
a purchaser into the belief that the article contained in the box, chocolate, was 
manufactured in Italy.
You have heard the testimony of witnesses as to the import of the term 
?' Italian Chocolates," and weighing the testimony that was introduced by the 
Government in relation thereto, and also that on the part of the defendant, 
just answer that question.
You must be satisfied, beyond all reasonable doubt, that a purchaser of a 
box of chocolates labeled as charged in the indictment, reading the label would 
at once conclude that the chocolates were manufactured in Italy. If there is 
any other construction to be placed upon it, your verdict must be for the 
defendant.
You will now retire, gentlemen. The clerk has prepared forms of verdict, 
which you will take with you.
Mr. DENMAN. Note an exception to the refusal of the court to give the three 
instructions requested by the defendant on the ground that they are warranted 
by the law and the facts.
W. M. HAYS,
Acting Secretary of Agriculture. 
WASHINGTON, D. C.} January 21,1913.
2238
o