12186. Adulteration and misbranding- of canned oyster*. U. S. v. J. Lang- 
rail & Bro., Inc., a Corporation. Plea ot entity. Fine, $15 and 
costs. (F. & D. No. 17948. I. S. Nos. 5880-v, 7989-v, 8652-v, 10356-v, 
11416-v, 11962-v.)
On March 22, 1924, the United States attorney for the District of Mary- 
land, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis- 
trict Court of the United States for said district an information against 
J. Langrall & Bro., Inc., a corporation, trading at Baltimore, Md., alleging 
shipment by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as 
amended, in various consignments, namely, on or about December 20, 1922, 
from the State of Maryland into the State of Texas; on or about December 
20, 1922, and January 21 and April 24, 1923, respectively, from the State of 
Maryland into the State of California; on or about January 2, 1923, from the 
State of Maryland into the State of Indiana; and on or about February 23, 
1923, from the State of Maryland into the State of Utah, of quantities of 
canned oysters which were adulterated and misbranded. The article was 
labeled variously: " Maryland Chief * * * Cove Oysters Contents 5 
Ounces Packed by J, Langrall & Bro. Inc.;" "Groub's Belle Brand * * * 
Extra Heavy Select Cove Oysters Contents 5 Oz. Avd.;" " Salt Rock Brand 
* * * Contents 4 Oz. Baltimore Cove Oysters * * * Packed By J. 
Langrall & Bro. Inc. Baltimore, Md.;" " Parrot Brand * * * Baltimore 
Cove Oysters Contains 4 Oz. Oysters * * * Packed By J. Langrall &" 
Bro.,  Inc.  Baltimore,  Md.,  U.  S.  A."
Examination of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department 
showed that it contained excessive brine and that the cans contained less 
than the declared weights of oysters.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that a substance, to wit, brine, had been mixed and packed therewith so 
as to lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality and had been sub- 
stituted in part for oysters, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, to wit, " Oysters," 
" Contents 5 Oz.," " Contents 5 Ounces," " Contents 4 Oz.," and " Contains 4 Oz. 
Oysters," as the case might be, borne on the labels attached to the cans con- 
taining the respective lots of the article, were false and misleading, in that 
they represented that the said article consisted wholly of oysters and that each 
of the said cans contained 4 ounces or 5 ounces, as the case might be, 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 consisted wholly
<of oysters and that each of the said cans contained 4 ounces or 5 ounces, as 
the case might be, of the said article, whereas, in truth and in fact, it did 
not consist wholly of oysters but did consist in part of excessive brine, and 
the said cans did not contain the amounts declared on the .respective labels 
but did contain less amounts. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason 
that the article was food in package form and the quantity of the contents 
was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the package.
On March 22, 1924, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on be- 
half of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $15 and costs.
HOWAEO M. GORE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.