United States v. Fifty Barrels of Whisky

Citations

• 165 F. 966
• 1908 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190

Syllabus

<p>1. Food (§ 24*) — Pure Eood Law — Adulteration or Misbranding — Proceeding FOB FOBFEITUBE.</p> <p>A preliminary examination by tbe Department of Agriculture of an alleged adulterated or misbranded food or drug product, as provided for by-section 4, Food and Drugs Act June 30, 1906, c. 3915, 34 Stat. 769 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 929), is not a necessary condition precedent, to tbe filing of a libel in rem for the condemnation of such product under section 10 of tbe act, 34 Stat. 771 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 934).</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Food, Cent. Dig. § 17; Dec. Dig. § 24.*]</p> <p>2: Food (§ 24*) — Pure Food Law — Proceeding for Forfeiture of Misbranded Article — Defenses.</p> <p>In a proceeding by libel by tbe United States under Food and Drugs Act June 30, 1906, c. 3015, § 10, 34 Stat. 771 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907. p. 934), for tbe forfeiture and condemnation of a quantity of distilled spirits shipped in interstate commerce and alleged to have been misbranded contrary to tbe provisions of said act, it is no defense that tbe brand was placed upon tbe packages containing such liquor by tbe United States gauger upon information received from tbe distiller in accordance with tbe usual practice, or that tbe same kind of liquor bad for a number of years been so branded and sold under sncb brand to tbe knowledge of tbe agents and officers of tbe United States.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Food, Cent. Dig. § 17; Dec. Dig. § 24.*]</p> <p>3. Estoppel (§ 62*) — Equitable Estoppel — United States — Acts of Officers or Agents.</p> <p>Tbe United States cannot be estopped to proceed for tbe violation of a federal statute by tbe acts of any of its agents.</p> <p>[Ed Note. — For other cases, see Estoppel, Cent. Dig. § 152; Doe. Dig. § 62.*</p> <p>As against state or United States, see note to State of Michigan v. Jackson, L. & S. R. Co., 16 C. C. A. 353.]</p>