7147.  Adulteration   and   Misbranding of   olive   oil.     XI.   S.    *    *    *   v.   tfari^y
Arony   afrit?  George  P&jjttsfas   (Arwny  ?fe  Fapitsas).    Wea   &H gsailty.
Fi*e, $2#0.     (P. & D. No. 9T95--    I.  &. No. 7511-3?.)
On July IS, 1919, the United States attorney for the Southern District' of 
New York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District- Court of the United States for said district an information against 
Harry Arony and George Papitsas, copartners, trading as Arony & Papitsas, 
New York, N. Y., alleging shipment by said defendants, in violation of the 
Food and Drugs Act, as amended, on August 17, 1918, from the State of New 
York into the State of Illinois, of a quantity of an article, labeled in part 
" Tipo Lucca Olio Sopraffino Stella d'Oro,," which was adulterated and mis- 
branded.
Analysis- of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de- 
partment showed- the Halphen test for cottonseed, oil to be positive and the 
net voltma-e of the cans to be 0.483 gallon.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason that 
a substance, to wit, cottonseed oil, had been- mixed therewith so- as- to- lower, 
reduce,- and injuriously affect its quality and strength, and had been substi- 
tuted in large part for olive oil, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding of the article was- alleged for the reason that the statements,, to 
wit, " Tipo Lucca Olio Sopraffino, \ Gallon Net," borne on the cans containing 
the article,, regarding it and the ingredients and substances contained therein, 
were false and misleading in that they represented .that the article was pure 
olive oil, that it was a*foreign product, to wit, an olive oil produced in Lucca, 
in the kingdom of Italy, and that each of said cans contained \ gallon net of the 
article, and for the further reason that it was labeled as aforesaid- so as to 
deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it was pure olive oil, that 
it was* a foreign product, to wit, an olive oil produced in Lucca, in the kingdom 
of Italy, and that each of said cans contained \ gallon net of the article, whereas, 
in truth and in fact, it was not pure olive oil, but was a mixture composed in 
part of cottonseed oil, and was not a foreign product, to wit, an olive oil pro- 
duced in Lucca, in the kingdom of Italy, but was a domestic product, to wit, 
a product produced in the United States of America, and each of said cans did 
not contain \ gallon net of the articie, but contained a less amount, and for the 
further reason that it was falsely branded as to the country in which it was 
manufactured and produced in that it was a product manufactured and pro- 
duced in whole or in part in the United States of America, and was branded 
as manufactured and produced in the kingdom of Italy; and for the further 
reason that the statements borne on the cans purported that the article was a
foreign product, when not so. Misbranding of. the article was alleged for the 
further reason that it was food in package form, and the quantity of the con- 
tents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the package. 
On July 30, 1919, the defendants entered pleas of guilty to the information, 
and the court imposed a fine of $200.
E. D. BALL, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.