1188. Adulteration   and misbranding of  nut  spread.     TJ.   S.   v.   6   Cases  and   8
Cases of Nut Spread.    Default decree of condemnation.    Product ordered 
.. delivered   to na* welfare  organization.    (F.   D.   C.   No.  1813.    Sample   No.
88914-D.)
This product consisted of peanut butter and a fat other than peanut oil. It 
had been whipped so as to incorporate air in it and was also short of the 
declared volume.
On April 15, 1940, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Indiana filed a libel against 14 cases of nut spread at Fort Wayne, Ind., 
alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about 
February 28, 1940, by Lurch Nut Products, Inc., from Maywood, Ill.; and 
charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. It was labeled in part: 
(Jars) "Lurch's Nut Spread [design of peanuts] 8 P. Ozs. [or "15 Fl. Ozs."]."
Adulteration was alleged in substance in that a mixture of peanut butter and 
added foreign fat which had been increased in volume by the incorporation of 
air had been substituted for peanut butter, which the article purported to be. 
The article was alleged to be adulterated further in that a substance, air, had 
been incorporated therein so as to increase its bulk.
It was alleged to be misbranded in that the name "nut spread" and the 
design of peanuts implying that the product was peanut butter, were false
and misleading as applied to peanut butter in which excess air had been 
incorporated and which contained foreign fat. It was alleged to be misbranded 
further in that the statements "8 P. Ozs." and "15 a. Ozs." were false and 
misleading since they were not correct. It was alleged to be misbranded fur- 
ther in that it was in package form and did not bear an accurate statement 
of the quantity of contents.
On June 18, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation 
was entered and the product was ordered delivered to a welfare organization.
OLIVE OIL