95. Misbranding of Arrid. U. S. v. 119% Dozen Jars of Arrid. Consent decree 
of condemnation and destruction.     (F. D. C. No. 338.    Sample No. 45575-E.)
This product was contained in jars which, because of the thickness of the 
glass and the manner in which they were formed, contained about one-third the 
amount indicated by their outward appearance.
On or about August 2, 1939, the United States attorney for the Northern 
District of Georgia filed a libel against 119% dozen jars of Arrid at Atlanta, 
Ga., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or 
about July 8, 1939, by the Feminine Products Co. from Jersey City, N. J.; and 
charging that its containers were so made, formed, and filled as to be mislead-
ing. The article was labeled in part: "Arrid * * * Carter Products Inc. 
Distributors, New York, N. Y."
On August 12, 1939, upon application of the claimant, Carter Products, Inc., 
the court for the Northern District of Georgia ordered the case transferred 
to the District of New Jersey and also ordered all records and papers trans- 
mitted to that jurisdiction. On March 17, 1940, the claimant having repre- 
sented to the court that it had changed its containers and having consented to 
the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered. The decree con- 
tained the following provision: "Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed that this 
is a proceeding in rem and that this decree is to be without prejudice to the 
rights of the United States of America or the said claimant, Carter Products, 
Inc., a Maryland corporation, having its principal office and place of business 
in the Borough of Manhattan, City, County, and State of New York, in any 
other litigation, and without prejudice to the right of the claimant to deny 
in any other or future litigation that the libeled product herein is misbranded 
or otherwise violates the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 
the court having taken no proof in support of the allegations of the libel and 
answer." The United States attorney entered an objection to the form of the 
decree.
On November 19, 1941, the court ordered the product destroyed.
INDEX TO NOTICES OF JUDGMENT C. N. J. NOS. 71-95
PRODUCTS
N. J. No.
Ambrosia Tightener 
84
Arrid 
95
Bay rum 
82
Camelline 
85
Caroid Dental Powder 
91
Chin-Firm 
87
Chin-Up 
--    88
Eyelash and eyebrow dyes 
* <6-78
Hair and scalp preparations 82, 89, 90
Ipana Tooth Paste 
92
Kix Kinks Hair Straiter 
79
La Bonita Hollywood Skin Stimulant-    86
Hollywood Texture Oil 
86
Louise Norris Lash & Brow Coloring     77
Mary Luckie Original Hair Tints     78
Miscellaneous cosmetics 
83
Natone Natural Oil for the Hair 
89
N. J. No. 
Paulette Bay Rum 
82
Hair Dressing 
82
Pepsodent Tooth Paste 
93
Roux Lash and Brow Tint 
176
Shaplcigh's Lily of the Valley  Shaving
Cream 
94
Shaving cream 
82, 94
Spark'l Shaving Cream 
82
S-T-D "The" Hair Tonic 
90
Tartaroff 
80
Tooth paste 
92,93
powder 
91
Willat Method  of Heatless Permanent
Waving 
71-75
Sulfolene Curling Solution No. 2     73
Witch hazel 
81
SHIPPERS, MANUFACTURERS, AND DISTRIBUTORS
American FermentCo., Inc.: N- J- N?-
Caroid Dental Powder 
91
Ashford JDistributing Co.:
WiHat /Method of Heatless Permanent
Waving 
74, 75
Bentley, J. D.: 
,    ? .
Natone Natural Oil for the Hair     89
Bristol-Myers Co.:
Ipana Tooth Paste 
92
Burtley Co.:
Chin-Firm 
87
Carter Products Co.:
Arrid 
95
Curtis & Travis:
miscellaneous  cosmetics 
83
Dorosy, Inc.:
Kix Kinks Hair Straiter 
79
Dustin, G. A.:
S-T-D "The" Hair Tonic 
90
Edlis, Inc.:
witch hazel 
81
Feminine Products Co.:
Arrid 
95
Heatless Permanent Wave Co.:
Willat Method of Heatless Permanent
Waving 
71-74
Hinze Ambrosia, Inc.:
Ambrosia Tightener 
84
86
77 
78
House of Hollywood : 
N- J- N?-
LaBonita  Hollywood  Skin  Stimulant 
and  LaBonita  Hollywood   Texture
Oil 
Kallman, L. R., & Co.:
Chin-Up 
Louise Norris  Co. :
Louise Norris Lash & Brow Coloring 
Marlu Co.:
Mary Luckie Original Hair Tints 
Norris, Louise.    See Louise Norris Co. 
Pepsodent Co.:
Pepsodent Tooth Paste 
93
Roux Distributing Co.:
Roux Lash and Brow Tint 
176
Sophia Co., Inc.:
Willat    Sulfolene    Curling    Solution
No. 2 
73
Spark'l Co.:
shaving   cream,   hair   dressing,   and
bay rum 
82
Spark'l Paulette Co., Inc.    See Spark'l
Co. 
Tartaroff Co.:
Tartaroff 
80
Webster, Wm. A., Co.:
Shapleigh's Shaving Cream 
94
Willett, W. M.:
Camelline 
85
1 Contains instructions to the jury.
o
The cases reported herewith were instituted in the United States District 
Courts by the United States attorneys acting upon reports submitted by direction 
of the Federal Security Administrator.
WATSON B. MUXES, Acting Administrator, Federal Security Agency.
WASHINGTON, D. 0., November 13, 1944.
CONTENTS
Page
Cosmetics actionable because of adulteration 
"with poisonous or deleterious substances.    51
Cosmetics actionable because of contamination 
with filth... ? 
_   52
Cosmetics actionable because of adulteration 
with uncertified coal-tar colors     53
Page
Cosmetics charged to  be actionable because 
of false and misleading statements in the
labeling. 
54
Cosmetics in deceptive containers 
59
Cosmetics, subject to the drug provisions of the 
Act 
60
COSMETICS ACTIONABLE BECAUSE OF ADULTERATION WITH 
POISONOUS OR DELETERIOUS SUBSTANCES
Notices of judgment Nos. 96 to 98 report actions against cosmetics which 
contained lacquer. Numerous reports had been received of injuries resulting 
from these or a similar product, and, in each case of seizure, complaints had been 
received of injuries resulting from the particular shipment of the goods seized.