THE SOLICITOR. 799 



Libel was filed in the eastern district of Pennsylvania afjainst 1,200 

 bags of green coffee, and adulteration alleged on the fmdmg of the 

 Department's analysts that the product was filthy, decomposed, or 



Eutrid. Judgment was rendered in favor of the claimant, the court 

 olding that evidence offered was insullicient to support the allega- 

 tions of the libel. 



There were also terminated during the year GO criminal cases 

 reported during previous years. Fines were imposed in these cases 

 amounting to S2,701.31. 



Decrees of condemnation and forfeiture were rendered in 43 seizures 

 effected during previous years. In all, the amount of fines imposed 

 during the year 1910 in criminal cases was $11,049.31, and 175 

 decrees of condemnation and forfeiture were rendered. 



In addition to the above, important suits arising out of the enforce- 

 ment of the act were terminated favorably to the Government. In 

 one proceeding bills in equity were filed m the southern district of 

 Iowa, praying that the United States attorney', the United States 

 marshal, and an inspector of the Department of Agriculture be 

 restrained from making further seizures of flour bleached by the 

 Alsop process. The defendants filed demurrers to the bills of com- 

 plaint, and the questions of law were fully argued to the court. 

 (Shawnee Milling Co. v Temple et al., 179 Fed., 517.) Complainants' 

 bills were dismissed, and the court rendered an opinion u])holding the 

 constitutionalitv of the act and the right of the Government to seize 

 flour bleached by the Alsop process. Two suits instituted for the 

 recovery of the penalties of bonds filed by claimants of goods con- 

 demned and forfeited to the United States and released to them under 

 the provisions of section 10 of the act resulted in judgment in favor 

 of tlic United States. The bill filed in the previous year by the 

 Hipolite Egg Company, in the supreme court of the District of 

 Columbia, praying that the Secretary of Agriculture be restrained 

 from further enforcement of the food and drugs act, and in which a 

 rule to show cause why an injunction should not be granted was 

 pending, was dismissed by the petitioners. 



While the great majority of cases arising under the act up to the 

 close of the year were uncontested, certain important principles have 

 been estal)lishe(l in the comparatively small number of cases in which 

 defendants or claimants have taken issue with the Government. 



The constitutionalit}" of the act has been attacked and upheld by 

 the courts in the following cases: 



United States v. 100 Cases of Tepee Apples and 172 Cases of Tepee Blackberries. 

 Western district of Missouri, Notice of Judgment No. 36. (179 Fed., 985.) 



United States v. 300 Cases of Mapleine. Northern district of Illinois, Notice of 

 Judfi;ment No. 163. 



United States v. 420 Sacks of Flour, eastern district of Louisiana, Notice of Judgment 

 No. 382. (ISO Fed., 518.) 



Shawnee M illing Co. et al, complainants, v. Marcellus L. Temple, United States attor- 

 ney, et al., southern district of Iowa. Notice of Judgment No. 497. ^179 Fed., 517.) 



United States v. Edward Westen Tea and Spice Co., eastern district of Missouri, 

 Notice of Judgment No. 194. 



United States v. Buffalo Cold Storage Company, western district of New York, 

 Notice of Judgment No. 482. (179 Fed., 865.) 



In United States v. Charles L. Heinle Specialty Co., tried in tiie 

 eastern district of Pennsylvania (Notice of Judgment No. 389, Circu- 

 lar No. 29, Ollice of the Solicitor), section 9 of the act was held to be 

 constitutional. 



