408 



ANNUAL KEPOETS OF DEPAETMENT OF AGEICULTXJEE. 



made; and in 1 a verdict was returned for the claimant after trial to 

 the court and a jury. In the 325 cases in which decrees of condemna- 

 tion and forfeiture were entered the goods were destroyed in 133 : 

 released on bond or otherwise in 166; and sold in 26. In many of 

 the cases in which the product was ordered released or sold, the decree 

 of the court provided that the product should be sorted and that that 

 portion found unfit for food should be destroyed. 



At the close of the year 398 cases were pending, of which 188 were 

 criminal prosecutions and 210 were seizures. 



In addition to the cases reported by this department to the De- 

 partment of Justice the food and drugs officials of the various States 

 and of the District of Columbia, collaborating with the department 

 in the enforcement of the act, are shown by the records of this office 

 to have reported 05 cases to the United States attorneys which were 

 terminated during the year. Of these 57 were criminal cases and 38 

 were seizures. In all of the criminal cases there were convictions or 

 the collateral deposited by defendants was forfeited on account of 

 their nonappearance. In all of the seizure cases decrees were entered 

 and the products released on bond in 18 cases, destroyed in 12, and 

 ordered sold in 7 cases. The fines or amounts forfeited as collateral 

 in the criminal cases were as follows : 



Fines in food and drug cases begun by United States attorneys. 



1 Released on personal bond. 



One thousand two hundred and fifty notices of judgment were 

 published during the year. 



FOOD AND DRUGS CASES OF INTEREST, 



In United States v, Herman Heimann^ Notice of Judgment 6120, 

 involving an interstate shipment of milk, the court instructed the 

 jury that the food and drugs act seeks to give to the people the 

 natural product of food to which they are entitled and that what- 

 ever butter fat milk does contain the shipper should ship the whole 

 milk without any abstraction of any part of it. 



In United States v. Union Dairy Go.^ Notice of Judgment 6142, 

 involving another shipment of milk, the plaintiff in error contended 

 that it was shipping the milk from a receiving station in Illinois to 

 itself in Missouri, there to be treated, impurities removed, and the 

 milk standardized; that while in transit it was not an article of food, 

 such as was defined by the food and drugs act. and did not become 

 such an article of food until after treatment. Upon this proposition 

 the United States circuit court of appeals for the seventh circuit said 

 that to adopt such a conclusion would do violence to the plain lan- 

 guage of the statute. The court further said that in passing the food 



