23903. Adulteration and misbranding of salad oil. U. S. v. 62 Cans of Alleged Olive Oil. Default decree of condemnation. Product ordered delivered to charitable institutions. (F. & D. no. 32970. Sample nos. 67448-A, 7953-A.) This case involved a product which was found to consist of mixtures of cot- tonseed oil and olive oil, or peanut oil and olive oil, which was labeled td convey the impression that it was olive oil of foreign origin. The product was also short volume. On or about June 19, 1934, the United States attorney for the District of Connecticut, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the district court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 62 cans of a product, purporting to be olive oil, at New Haven, Conn., alleging that it had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about October 23, 1933, by Pietro Esposito & Bro., from New York, N. Y., and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act as amended. The article was labeled in part: "La Gloriosa Packing Co. P. E. & B. Inc." The article was alleged to be adulterated in that mixtures of cottonseed oil and olive oil, and peanut oil and olive oil, had been substituted for imported olive oil, which the labeling as a whole implied the article to be. Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, " La Gloriosa Brand ", " Prize Awarded at Exhibition of Rome 1924 ", " Italy ", " Olio Finis- simo", and the designs of a crown, olive branches, and medal carrying the Italian national colors, and the prominent words "Lucca Olive Oil", in the statement, "Pure and Delicious Oil Composed of Eighty Five Percent Choice Salad Oil and Fifteen Percent Lucca Olive Oil", appearing on the labeling of the product, were misleading and tended to deceive and mislead the purchaser, since they created the impression that the article was imported olive oil; whereas it was not. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the article purported to be a foreign product when not so; for the further reason that the statement on the label, " One Gallon Net", was false and misleading and tended to deceive and mislead the purchaser; 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 made was incorrect. On September 11, 1934, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condem- nation and forfeiture was entered, and the court ordered that the product be delivered to charitable institutions. M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary! of Agriculture.