3625. Adulteration and misbranding of so-called preserved Goshen butter. U. S. v. 50 Cases?
of Preserved Goshen Butter. Consent decree of condemnation and forfeiture. Prod-?
net released on bond. (F. & D. Nos. 5708, 5709, 5710, 5711. I. S. No. 8706-h.?
S. No. E-36.)
On May 4, 1914, the United States attorney for the District of Porto Rico,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court?
of the United States for said district a libel for the seizure and condemnation of?
50 cases of so-called Goshen butter remaining unsold in the original unbroken?
packages, 25 of said cases, consisting of 500 cans of 5 pounds each, and 5 cases,?
consisting of 100 cans of 5 pounds each, at San Juan, Porto Rico; 5 of said?
cases, consisting of 100 cans of 5 pounds each, at Bayamon, Porto Rico, and 10?
of said cases, consisting of 200 cans of 5 pounds each, and 5 cases, consisting of?
100 cans of 5 pounds each, at Aguadilla, Porto Rico, alleging that the product?
had been shipped on or about April 4, 1914, by V. Lopez & Co., of New York,?
N. X., and transported from the State of New York into the island of Porto?
Rico, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and?
Drugs Act. The product was labeled: "Average net weight five pounds Pre??
served Goshen Butter V. Lopez & Co. New York, U. S. Marca Vaca (design?
of a cow being milked)." (On side of said label, and printed on the tin in small?
type) "This butter is preserved by the addition of corn syrup and salt brine."
It was alleged in the libel that the said butter contained an added deleterious?
ingredient, to wit, boric acid, which might render said alleged butter injurious?
to health, in violation of section 7 of the Food and Drugs Act of June 30, 1906,?
paragraph 5, under food. It was further alleged in the libel that ^he goods,?
being labeled in prominent type " Preserved Goshen Butter" and bearing a?
pictorial representation of a cow, which inscription and representation were?
false and misleading in view of the fact that the product was a coimpound,?
this misleading impression not being corrected by the supplemental statement?
" This butter is preserved by the addition of corn syrup and salt brine," the?
labels being false and misleading, were, therefore, misbranded in violation?
of section 8, same act, first, general paragraph and paragraphs 1 and 2,?
under food. It was further alleged that the'article was misbranded and?
mislabeled as aforesaid so as to mislead and deceive the purchaser or pur??
chasers thereof, in that the package, container, and label on the article bore a?
statement regarding the article and the ingredients and substances contained?
therein which was false and misleading, that is to say, the said label on the?
cans was so arranged as to lead the public to believe that said cans contained?
pure butter, and the said statements on said packages and containers were?
so arranged as to cause the purchaser or purchasers thereof to believe that the?
article consisted of pure butter, whereas in fact the contents thereof were not?
pure butter, but were a compound of butter, corn sirup, and salt brine, and?
preserved by the use of boric acid.
On June 1, 1914, Albert F. Lopez and Aimee C. Lopez, copartners, doing?
business under the firm name and style of V. Lopez & Company, New York, N. Y.,?
claimants, having filed their answer admitting all of the allegations of the?
libel, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered?
by the court that the product should be delivered to said claimants upon the?
payment of the costs of the proceedings and execution of a good and sufficient?
bond in the sum of $1,170, in conformity with section 10 of the act.
D. F. HOUSTON, Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, March 12, 1915.
156	
BTTEEAU   OF   CITEMISTEY.	
[Supplements.