26028. Adulteration and misbranding of dog and cat food. IT. S. v. 200 and 
400 Cases of Dog and Cat Food. Decree of condemnation. Product 
released under bond to be relabeled. (F. & D. no. 37387. Sample no. 
46878-B.)
These cases involved dog and cat foods which were represented to contain 
substantial amounts of fresh, lean, solid red meat and choice cuts of meat 
Examination showed that they consisted chiefly of barley and carrots and that 
they contained some crushed bone and other substances. They contained ap- 
proximately 2 percent of meat products.
On or about March 19, 1936, the United States attorney for the District of 
Maryland, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 600 cases of dog 
and cat food at Baltimore, Md.,- alleging that the article had been shipped in 
interstate commerce on or about January 24, 1936, by the Animal Foods Co., 
from San Jose, Calif., and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation 
of the Food and Drugs Act The shipment consisted of two brands, labeled in 
part: "Bar-None Brand Food for Dogs & Cats * * * Packed by Bar-None 
Sales Co., San Jose, Calif."; "Favorite Dog and Cat Food * * * Packed 
by Animal Foods Company, San Jose, Calif."
The Bar-None brand was alleged to be adulterated in that barley and carrots 
with pieces of crushed bone and pieces of the stomachs of ruminants, a small 
amount of skeletal muscle and added water had been mixed and packed with 
the article so as to reduce or lower its quality; and in that said substances had 
been substituted for fresh, lean, solid red meat and choice cuts of fresh meat, 
which the article purported to contain. The Favorite brand was alleged to be 
adulterated in that barley, carrots, crushed bones, and added water had been 
mixed and packed with the article so as to reduce or lower its quality; and 
in that said substances had been substituted for fresh, lean, solid red meat 
and choice cuts of fresh meat, which the article purported to contain.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the following statements on 
the labels were false and misleading and tended to deceive and mislead the pur- 
chaser when applied to a product of the composition found: (Bar-None brand) 
"You know in advance what each can contains. Every ingredient of known 
quality and guaranteed in plain language. Guaranteed Ingredients. Fresh, 
lean, solid red-meat: cracked potted barley: meat-meal: bone-meal: carrots: 
wheat-bran and charcoal. The fresh meat used contains the choice cuts"; 
(Favorite brand) "This quality guarantee removes all doubt * * * Assures 
protection for your pets because every ingredient is shown in plain language. 
Made of fresh lean solid red-meat: cracked potted barley: meat-meal: bone- 
meal: carrots: wheat-bran and charcoal. The fresh meat used contains the 
choice cuts."
On May 19, 1936, claimant having appeared and filed an answer, judgment 
of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be released 
under bond conditioned that it be relabeled under the supervision of this 
Department
W. R. GBEGG, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.