11562.?Adulteration  and  misbranding of  Sparlcling: "White   Seal.     V.   S.  v.
4 Cases, et al., of Sparkling: White Seal. Consent decrees of con??
demnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (F. & D. Nos. 14035, 14036.?
I. S. Nos. 6481-t, 6482-t.    S. Nos. E-2919, E-2920.)
On February 7, 1921, the United States attorney for the District of New?
Jersey, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis??
trict Court of the United States for said district libels praying the seizure and?
condemnation of 12 cases and 36 bottles of Sparkling White Seal, remaining?
unsold in part at Newark and in part at Orange, N. J., alleging that the?
article had been shipped by the Duffy-Mott Co., Inc., New York, N. Y., in part?
November 5 and in part November 8, 1920, and transported from the State of?
New York into the State of New Jersey, and charging adulteration and mis??
branding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act. The article was labeled in?
part: " Sparkling * * * White Seal Made By Duffy-Mott Co. Inc. New?
York."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libels for the reason that a?
substance, to wit, artificially carbonated, sweetened, diluted apple juice, flavored?
with capsicum, had been mixed and packed therewith so as to lower and reduce?
and injuriously affect its quality and strength and had been substituted in?
whole or in part for champagne which the said article from its labeling and foil-?
covered wired cork and neck and general dress of the bottle purported to be.?
Adulteration was alleged for the further reason that an artificially carbonated,?
sweetened, diluted apple juice, flavored with capsicum, had been mixed with the?
article in a manner whereby damage and inferiority were concealed.
306	
BUREAU  OF  CHEMISTRY.
[Supplement 162,
Misbranding was alleged in substance for the reason that the statement?
appearing on the bottles, regarding the article and the ingredients and sub??
stances contained therein, to wit, " Sparkling * * * White Seal," to??
gether with the general appearance of the said bottles, to wit, foil-covered wired?
cork and neck, were false and misleading in that they represented that the ar??
ticle was a well-known brand of champagne, containing an alcoholic content,?
to wit, White Seal, made by Moet & Chandon in France, and for the further?
reason that the said statement and the pictorial representation of symbolic?
royal lions deceived and misled the purchaser into the belief that the article?
was an imported alcoholic liquor, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not?
but was a product composed of artificially carbonated, sweetened, diluted apple?
juice, flavored with capsicum. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason?
that the article was a product composed of artificially carbonated, sweetened,?
diluted apple juice, flavored with capsicum, prepared in imitation of champagne?
and offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article, to wit, White?
Seal, a champagne made in France.
On June 23, 1923, the claim and answer previously entered by the Duffy-Mott?
Co., claimant, having been withdrawn, judgment of condemnation and for??
feiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court that the product be de??
stroyed by the United States marshal.
HOWARD M. GORE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.