269. Adulteration and misbranding' of prophylactics.    IT. S. v. 79 Gross and 102,
Gross of Prophylactics (and 4 other seizure actions against prophylac-
tics). Default decrees of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos.
1344, 1426, 1452, 1537, 1758. Sample Nos. 61704-D, 61706-D, 63193-D, 63194-D,
74457-D, 86362-D, 16031-E, 16033-E, 16036-E.)
On or about January 15, February 2, 8, and 28, and April 8, 1940, the United
States attorneys for the Northern District of Texas, Southern District of New
York, District of Minnesota, Southern District of Texas, and Western District of
Oklahoma filed libels against 181 gross of prophylactics at Dallas, Tex.; 9-
gross at New York, N. Y.; 49 gross at Minneapolis, Minn.; 124 gross at Houston,
Tex.; and 524? gross at Oklahoma City, Okla. On February 6, 1940, the libel
filed in the Northern District of Texas was amended to cover an additional 163
gross of the product. It was alleged in the libels that the article had been
shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about January 21,
1939, to on or about March 12, 1940, by W. H. Reed & Co., Inc., from Atlanta Ga.;
and that it was adulterated and that certain shipments were also misbranded.
Four of the shipments were labeled an
" part respectively: "Surety," "Red-Pak,"
"Golden Pheasant," or "Pan."   The remaining shipment bore no brand name.
The article in all shipments was alleged to be adulterated in that its quality
fell below that which it purported or was represented to possess.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to certain shipments in that representa-
tions in the labeling of the Red-Pak brand that it was effective for the preven-
tion of disease and was guaranteed for 5 years; those in the labeling of a
portion of the Golden Pheasant brand that it was a prophylactic; those in the
labeling of the Pan brand that it was carefully tested and was a fine-quality
guaranteed prophylactic; and those in the labeling of the lot that bore no
brand that it was made of selected, choice grade materials, that it had been
made with all the care and skill which long experience in manufacturing can
give, and was effective for the prevention of disease, were false and misleading.
On February 23, March 12 and 19, April 16, and May 7, 1940, no claimant
having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the product
was ordered destroyed.