10977. Adulteration and misbranding of flour. U. S. v. 800 Bags, et al, of?
Flour. Consent decrees of condemnation and forfeiture. Prod??
uct released under bond. (F. & D. Nos. 16315, 16320, 16328, 16817,?
16818. I. S. Nos. 14443-t, "34439-t, 14440-t, 14445-t, 8082-v, 8083-v.?
S. Nos. W-J084, W-1085, W-1086, W-1089, W-1212, W-1213.)
On May 12, 15, and 17, and September 19, 1922, respectively, the United?
States attorney for the Northern District of California, acting upon reports by?
the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for?
said district libels for the seizure and condemnation of 3,460 sacks of flour, re??
maining in the original unbroken packages at San Francisco, Calif., consigned?
by the Kalispell Flour Mill Co., Kalispell, Mont., alleging that the article had?
been shipped from Kalispell, Mont., between the dates of April 25 and August?
14, 1922, and transported from the State of Montana into the State of Cali??
fornia, and. charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food?
and Drugs Act, as amended. The article was labeled in part, variously: " The?
Royal Milling Co. Rex * * * Kalispell Flour Mill Company, Kalispell Mon??
tana. 98 Lbs.;" " 100? Strong Diamond Hitch Hard Wheat Flour Manufac??
tured For Royal Milling Co. Great Falls, Mont., Bleached 98 Lbs.; " " Liberty?
Patent Flour Made From Selected Hard Wheat * * * 98 Lbs. Net When?
Packed."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libels for the reason that?
water had been mixed and packed with and substituted wholly or in part for?
the said article.
540	
BTJKEAU OF  CHEMISTEY.	
[Supplement 150,
Misbranding was alleged in substance for the reason that the statement ap??
pearing on the labels of the sacks containing the article, to wit, "98 Lbs.,"?
was false and misleading and deceived and misled the purchaser. Misbranding?
was alleged for the further reason that the article was [food] in package form,?
and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on?
the outside of the package.
On May 18, 24, and 26, and September 19, 1922, respectively, I-I. H. Cook, San?
Francisco, Calif., and the Kalispell Flour Mill Co., Kalispell, Mont., having en??
tered their appearance as claimants for the respective portions of the property?
and having consented to the entry of decrees, judgments of condemnation and?
forfeiture were entered, and it was ordered by the court that the product be?
released to the respective claimants upon payment of the costs of the proceed??
ings and the execution of good and sufficient bonds, in conformity with section?
10 of the act, conditioned in part that the said product ^e made to conform?
with the provisions of the said act, under the supervision of this department.
C. W. PUGSLET, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.