20545. Adulteration and  Misbranding of  orange  flavoring  extract.    U.   S.
-v. 1,120 Bottles of Fluidextract of Ginger and 256 Bottles of 
Orange Flavoring Extract. Default decree of condemnation, 
forfeiture, and destruction. (F. & D. no. 27755. I. S. no. 50327. S. no. 
5822.)
This action was brought against a shipment of orange extract, a food; and 
fluidextract of ginger, a drug. Samples of the orange extract were found to 
contain between one third and one fourth the quantity of orange oil required 
for orange extract. The article was labeled, "Alcohol.Not over 85%", which 
was deceptive in view of an alcohol content much lower than 85 percent. Fur- 
thermore, the statement of the quantity of the contents, " 2 ounces ", was not 
in terms of liquid measure; and the net content was less than 2 ounces by 
weight and less than 2 ounces by measure. The fluidextract of ginger is cov- 
ered by notice of judgment no. 20570.
On February 16, 1932, the United States attorney for the Eastern District 
of Missouri, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in 
the District Court of the United States for the district aforesaid a libel pray- 
ing seizure and condemnation of 1,120 bottles of fluidextract of ginger, and 
256 bottles of orange flavoring extract. It was alleged in the libel that the 
articles had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about November 6, 
1931, by the H. L. Jones Co., from Eldorado, Ark. to St. Louis, Mo., that they
remained unsold in the original bottles at St. Louis, Mo., and that they were 
adulterated and misbranded in violation of the Food and Drugs Act.
Adulteration of the orange extract was alleged for the reason that a flavor- 
ing extract deficient in orange oil had been substituted in part for the article, 
and for the further reason that it had been mixed and colored in a manner 
whereby inferiority was concealed.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement on the label, " Pure 
Orange Flavoring Extract", was false and misleading and deceived and mis- 
led the purchaser; for the further reason that the statement, " Alcohol not over 
85 percent", was deceptive to the purchaser when applied to a product con- 
taining not more than 56.5 percent of alcohol by volume; for the further reason 
that the article was offered for sale under the distinctive name of another 
article; and for the further reason that it was food in package form and the 
quantity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the 
outside of the package, since the statement of the contents was not expressed 
in terms of liquid measure. The statement " 2 ounces " was an overstatement 
of the quantity of the contents.
On January 11, 1933, no claimant having appeared for the property, judg- 
ment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the 
court that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
R. G. TUGWELL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.