tions require that goods must be actually manufactured by the firm represented on the label as the manufacturer. "When a proper name, other than that of the manufacturer, is placed upon a label, it must not be used in the possessive. For instance, CHARLES GASTON'S OLIVE OIL can only be properly used on an oil manufactured by Charles Gaston at Bordeaux. The same is true if the designation be employed. GASTON'S "On the other hand, the word 'Gaston' might be used in an adjective sense, and not in the possessive case as qualifying the words 'olive oil,' in a manner that would indicate that it represented a brand and not a manufacturer, as Or, GASTON'S OLIVE OIL OLIVE OIL, GASTON BRAND In such case, however, neither given name nor initials should be employed. The word 'Gaston' should be in the same type as 'olive oil' and in equal prominence, thus forming a part of the label. "The phrase 'Olive Oil, Charles Gaston Brand,' may be used, in which case the name of the actual manufacturer should appear, in order that no false indication of the name of the person or firm manufacturing the product may be given.' 991 § 275. Name of Manufacturers. The name of the manufacturer is often a guaranty in the market of the quality and purity of the manufactured product. In time these names often become practically trade marks, though not capable of registration. By a long usage 1 F. I. D. (as amended) 46. the public becomes used to the names attached to foods or drugs, and rely upon them. To permit a manufacturer to use a name thus established as a cloak for inferior goods is to permit a misbranding of the article, and to clearly fall within the prohibition of the Pure Food and Drugs Act on the question of misbranding. The statute does not require the name of the manufacturer to be placed upon the label, but if one be placed thereon it must be the name of the actual manufacturer. The mere placing of a name of a person or corporation upon a manufactured product is sufficient to carry the impression to the general public that such person or corporation manufactured the product thus labeled, without words to the effect that it was "manufactured by" such person or corporation, and is, therefore, a misbranding if not true. In the instance of a jobber or wholesaler, distributor, importer, agent, or the like, who desires to place his name upon the article, no objection can be taken to such usage if the name be accompanied by the words "packed for," "distributed by," "agent," "importer," or other words, so to indicate that the name is not used as a manufacturer or producer. The only restriction in the use of names is that a name must not be used which gives out the impression that its owner is the manufacturer or compounder of the article upon which it is placed; and this difficulty can be overcome by the proper use of language in connection therewith. But a name which a packer or manufacturer has the right to use as an assignee or successor can not be held to be a fictitious or improper name. The use of any fictitious name which purports to be the name of the manufacturer clearly falls within the prohibition of the statute, though the use of fictitious names on the labels is not expressly prohibited by the statute.1 § 276. Deceptive Labeling of Foods-Foreign Labels. The statute provides that if food "be labeled or branded 1 N. J. 580. To state on the label that it was manufactured by a particularly named person, when it was not manufactured by him, is to mislabel the article. N. J. 184. so as to deceive or mislead the purchaser, or purport to be a foreign product when not so," it shall be deemed mislabeled or misbranded; so it is taken as misbranded or mislabeled "if it be an imitation of or offered under the distinctive name of another article. ''1 These are very broad terms, and would seem to cover every possible case of so labeling or branding food as to deceive the public either as to its quality, character or origin. These provisions reach all instances of the use of labels in a foreign language, or of foreign names as the manufacturer's or producer's name, when used upon foods of a domestic origin in such a way as to lead the purchaser to believe it is of foreign origin. Such is a case where the name of a foreign locality is used as the locality of origin. If the label be in the English language, its repetition in a foreign language,-nor would additional representations thereto in a foreign language,-be deemed a mislabeling, if truthful? But a label and all necessary information must be in the English language. Yet the principal label may be "in a foreign language," but "all information required by law and such other information" as Regulation 17 requires must “appear upon it in English. Besides the principal label in the language of the country of production, there may be also one or more other labels, if desired, in other languages, but none of them more prominent than the principal label, and these other labels must bear the information required by law, but not necessarily in English." Descriptive matter upon the label must be "free from any statement, design or device regarding the article or the ingredients or substances contained therein, or quality thereof, or place of origin, which is false or misleading in any particular." "The use of any false or misleading statement, design or device appearing on any part of the label shall not be justified by any statement given as the opinion of any expert or other person, nor by any descriptive matter explaining the use of the false or misleading statement given as the opinion of an expert or other person, nor by any descriptive matter ex 1 Section 8. 2 Regulation 17. plaining the use of the false or misleading statement, design or device.'' § 277. False or Misleading Label, Design or Device. To label any article that is an imitation of any food or drug as a genuine article, or "under the name of another article," is to violate the statute. The object of the statute is to enable the purchaser when purchasing an article to ascertain from an examination of the statement or legend on the label just what are the contents of the package, bottle or carton to which it is attached; and if that statement or legend be false in whole or part, the object of the statute is perverted. A pictorial reproduction may as effectually mislead him as a direct statement in words, and is just as much a misbranding as a false statement. Thus, if a picture of a beehive and bees be placed upon a can of imitation or adulterated honey, the inference to be drawn therefrom is that it is pure bee honey, and if it be not it is misbranded or mislabeled. So take an instance of maple sugar or syrup, where maple leaves or a sugar camp is placed upon the label, when the sugar or syrup is not pure maple sugar or syrup; or an instance of placing coffee plants or scenes from coffee plantations upon packages not containing pure coffee. All such pictures hold out the idea that the articles upon which they are placed are pure articles of the kind it is intended to depict by their use, and are clearly acts of misbranding. Thus, a box of macaroni was labeled "Molino e pastificio a vapore Napoletano San Giovanni a Teduccio." In addition to these words the label bore a picture or design depicting a body of water with a smoking volcano in the distince, a Maltese cross, a lion, the monogram "A. R.," and a number of medals, on one of which was inscribed "Victor Emanuel, Italia." The picture design and words were to deceive the purchaser, for the reason that they purported that the macaroni in question was a foreign product, signifying and importing that it had been manufactured in the vicinity of Naples, Italy, and 3 Regulation 17. that after being so manufactured it had been imported into the United States from that country. In fact, the macaroni had been manufactured in the city of Philadelphia. It was held that it was improperly labeled.1 § 278. False Indication of Origin-Geographical Names. There is nothing in the statute which requires the label to contain a statement concerning the place where the article of food or drug had its origin, or where it was manufactured, except in the case of compounds or mixtures having a distinctive name.' But if a name be given as the place of the manufacture of the food or drug then the true name of its origin must be given. Thus, to label a can of fish "Broiled California Mackerel" when the fish was not taken in the State of California is to mislabel them. So to label a firkin of butter "The Elgin Butter Company, Elgin, Illinois," when the butter was made and put up in Wisconsin, is to falsely brand it. So to use the words "Caracas Cocoa,' when it comes from the State of Zulia in Venezuela, and not from either Rio Caribe, Guiria, Carupano, Rio Chico, Higuerto, and other places of the eastern coast of Venezuela, is to mislabel or misbrand it, for the brand gives it a false origin. There are many foods or drugs-particularly foods -that have acquired in the markets a reputation for excellence or a peculiar flavor. Such is Vermont Maple Syrup, Michigan apples, Maine canned corn, Baltimore oysters, Delaware peaches, Wisconsin cranberries, Elgin butter, Kentucky whisky, Indian River oranges, Smithfield hams, Western New York grapes, Ohio wine, and the like. These are geographical names in the nature of trade marks. The right to use them belongs not to any individual in particular, but to the producers located within a certain region. In the law of 1 N. J. 600; N. J. 167; N. J. 262; N. J. 487. A picture of a churn placed on oleomargarine is a representation that it is butter. People v. Griffin, 128 N. Y. Supp. 946. 1 Section 8. 2 N. J. 365. 3 N. J. 67. 4 N. J. 114. |