13503. Adulteration and misbranding? of canned tuna. U. S. v. 9 Cases 
of Tuna. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and de- 
struction.     (F.  & D.  No.  19931.    I.  S.  No.  14381-v.     S.  No.  E-5198.)
On March 28, 1925, the United States attorney for the District of Massachu- 
setts, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District 
Court of the United States for said district a libel praying the seizure and 
condemnation of 9 cases of tuna, remaining in the original unbroken packages
at Greenfield, Mass., alleging that the article had been shipped by M. De Bruyn 
Importing Co., from New York, N. Y., December 6, 1924, and transported from 
the State of New York into the State of Massachusetts, and charging adultera- 
tion and misbranding in violation of the food and drugs act. The article was 
labeled in part: " California Tuna Standard All Light Meat."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that a 
substance, fish other than tuna, had been mixed and packed therewith so as 
to reduce, lower, and injuriously affect its quality and strength and had been 
substituted wholly and in part for the said article.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement " Tuna Standard 
All Light Meat," borne on the labels, was false and misleading and deceived 
and misled the purchaser, and for the further reason that the article was 
offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article.
On June 8, 1925, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment of 
condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court 
that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
R. W. DTJNLAP, Actmg Secretary of Agriculture.