13292. Misbranding: of olive oil and salad oil. TJ. S. v. Nicholas G. Makris.. 
Plea of guilty. Fine, $70. (F. & D. No. 19287. I. S. Nos. 9826-v- 
9827-v, 11517-v, 11518-v, 20649-Y, 20650-v.)
On March 23, 1925, 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 
Nicholas G. Makris, New York, N. Y., alleging shipment by said defendant, in- 
violation of the food and drugs act as amended, from the State of New York 
into the State of Utah, in various consignments, namely, on or about March 
8 and September 29, 1923, respectively, of quantities 'of olive oil, and on or- 
about September 29 and October 13, 1923, respectively, of quantities of salad 
oil which were misbranded.    The articles were labeled in part, respectively: 
(Can)  "Makris Brand Imported Lucca Olive Oil    *    *    *    Net Contents One- 
Gallon"   (or  "Net Contents  Half Gallon"  or "Net Contents  One  Quart") 
"B.  G.  Makris"  and  "Uncle  Sam  Oil  Our Brand    *    *    *    Winterpressed* 
Vegetable  Salad Oil    *    *    *    Net Contents One Gallon    Packed By B.  G. 
Makris New York."
Examination by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department of 33 of the- 
1-gallon size cans, 30 of the half gallon size cans, and 41 of the 1-quart size- 
cans of olive oil showed that they averaged 113.4, 61.7, and-30.6 fluid ounces,, 
respectively. Examination by said bureau of 45 of the 1-gallon size cans of 
salad oil showed an average of 113.3 fluid ounces.
Misbranding of the articles was alleged in the information for the reason 
that the statements, to wit, "Net Contents One Gallon," "Net Contents Half" 
Gallon," and " Net Contents One Quart,"  borne on the cans containing the - 
respective articles, were false and misleading, in that they represented that 
the said cans contained 1 gallon, one half gallon, or 1 quart of the respective- 
articles, as the case might be, and for the further reason that the articles 
were labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the; 
belief that the said cans contained 1 gallon, one half gallon, or 1 quart of the - 
respective articles, as the case might be, whereas the said cans did not contain - 
the amounts declared on the labels but did contain less amounts.    Misbrand- 
ing was alleged for the further reason that the articles were food in package- 
form and  the quantity of the  contents  was  not plainly and conspicuously- 
marked on the outside of the packages.
On April 6, 1925, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the information,. 
and the court imposed a fine of $70.
R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.