16177. Adulteration and Misbranding of alfalfa meal.     U. S. v. 1000 Sacks,
et al., of Alfalfa Meal. Consent decrees of condemnation and for- 
feiture. Product released under bond. (F. & D. Nos. 23185, 23198. 
I. S. Nos. 0159, 03568, 03569.    S. Nos. 1286, 1299.)
On November 9, 1928, and November 19, 1928, respectively, the United States 
attorney for the Eastern District of New York, acting upon reports by the 
Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for 
said district libels praying seizure and condemnation of two lots, consisting of' 
140 sacks and 1,000 sacks, respectively, of alfalfa meal, remaining unsold in 
the original packages at Brooklyn, N, Y., alleging that the article had been 
shipped by the California Hawaiian Milling Co., from San Francisco, Calif., 
on or about October 15, 1928, and transported from the State of California into 
the State of New York, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation 
of the food and drugs act. The article was labeled in part: " Fine Ground 
Alfalfa Meal * * * Crude Protein, not less than 16.00 * * * Crude 
Fibre, not more than 28.00 * * * Manufactured by California Hawaiian 
Milling Co.    *    *    *    San Francisco, Cal."
It was alleged in the libels that the article was adulterated in that a sub- 
stance deficient in protein and containing an excessive amount of fiber had been 
substituted in part for the said article, and had been mixed and packed with it so 
as to reduce and lower its quality and strength.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, " Fine Ground 
Alfalfa Meal Crude Protein, not less than 16.00," with respect to a portion of 
the product, and " Fine Ground Alfalfa Meal Crude Protein, not less than 16.00, 
Crude Fibre, not more than 28.00," with respect to the remainder thereof, borne 
on the labels, were false and misleading and deceived and misled the purchaser 
when applied, with respect to the former portion, to a product containing less 
protein than declared, and, with respect to the latter portion, to a product which 
was essentially alfalfa stem, and which contained less protein and more fiber 
than declared. Misbranding was alleged with respect to a portion of the prod- 
uct for the further reason that it was offered for sale under the distinctive name 
of another article.
On' December 12, 1928, the California Hawaiian Milling Co. (Inc.), San 
Francisco, Calif., claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libels and 
having consented to the entry of decrees, judgments of condemnation and for- 
feiture were entered, and it was ordered by the court that the product be 
released to the said claimant upon payment of costs and the execution of bonds 
totaling $4,000, conditioned in part that it be relabeled.
R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.