10657. Adultei-ation and misbranding of table oil and misbranding of?
olive oil. TJ. S. * * * v. 8 Gallons, et aJL, of Alleged Olive Oil?
and 21 Cans of Allegjed Table Oil. Default decrees of condemna??
tion, forfeiture, and sale. (F. & D. Nos. 15042, 15132, 15189. I. S. Nos.?
6961-t, 6980-t, 6979h-t.    S. Nos.  E-3379, E-3408, El-3460.)
On June 14, July 14, and July 18, 1921, respectively, the United States attor??
ney for the Middle District of Pennsvlvania, acting upon reports by the Sec??
retary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the "United States for said?
district libels for the seizure and condemnation of 21 cans of table oil and 8?
gallons and 20 cans of olive oil, remaining in the original unbroken packages,?
in part at Pittston, Pa., and in part at Scranton, Pa., alleging that the articles?
had been shipped by the Caserta Importing Co, New York, N. Y., on or about?
May 17, and June 10, 1921, respectively, and transported from the State of New?
York into the State of Pennsylvania, and charging adulteration and misbranding?
of the said table oil and misbranding of the said olive oil in violation of the Food?
and Drugs Act, as amended. The so-called table oil was labeled in part, (can)?
" Finest Quality Table Oil Tipo Termini Imerese * * * 1 Gallon Net." The?
olive oil was labeled in part, (can) " * * * Caserta Brand Net Contents One?
Full Gallon"   (or "One Half Gallon")   "*    *    *    Pure Olive Oil.    *    *    *"
N. J. 10651-10700.] SERVICE  AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	378
Adulteration of the table oil was alleged in the libel for the reason that cot??
tonseed oil had been mixed and packed with and substituted wholly or in part?
for the said article, and for the further reason that it was mixed in a manner?
whereby its inferiority was concealed.
Misbranding of the so-called table oil was alleged in substance for the reason?
that the statements on the labels of the cans containing the said article, to wit,?
"Finest Quality Table Oil Tipo Termini Imerese * * * 1 Gallon Net,"?
together with a design showing olive trees and olive pickers, were false and?
misleading, and deceived and misled the purchaser, for the further reason that?
it purported to be a foreign product when not so, and for the further reason?
that it was an imitation of and was offered for sale under the distinctive name?
of another article, to wit, olive oil. Misbranding of the olive oil was alleged?
in substance for the reason that the statements on the labels of the respective?
sized cans containing the said article, to wit, " Net Contents One Full Gallon "?
and " Net Contents One Half Gallon," were false and misleading and deceived?
and misled the purchaser, since the said cans did not contain 1 gallon or ? gal??
lon, as the case might be, of the said article, but did contain less amounts.?
Misbranding was alleged with respect to both products for the reason that they?
were food in package form and the quantity of the contents was not plainly?
and conspicuously marked on the outside of the packages.
On November 15, 1921, no claimant having appeared for the property, judg??
ments of condemnation and forfeiture were entered, and it was ordered by the?
court that the products be sold by the United States marshal, after the oblitera??
tion of the labels of the so-called table oil and the statements, respectively,?
" One Full Gallon " and " Net Contents One-half Gallon " from the labels of the?
olive oil.
C. W. PTJGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.