733. Misbranding of Camelline.   U. S. v. 9 Dozen Bottles of Gamelline.   Default
decree of condemnation and destruction.    (F. D. C. No. 6948.    Sample No.
63431-E.)
On March 7, 1942, the United States attorney for the District of Oregon filed
a libel against the above-named product at Portland, Oreg., alleging that it had
been shipped on or* about August 28, 1941, by Walter M. Willett from San Fran-
cisco, Calif.; and charging that it was misbranded.
Analyses of samples of the article showed that it consisted essentially of cal-
cium carbonate, bismuth, subcarbonate, alcohol, and water.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that statements on the bottle label
and in an accompanying circular suggesting and representing that it was effica-
cious in preventing tooth decay, freckles, sunburn, poison ivy, poison oak, and in
relieving the irritation caused by poison oak and poison ivy, were false and mis-?(
leading since it would not be efficacious for such purposes.
It was also alleged to be misbranded under the provisions of the law applicable
to cosmetics, as reported in O. N. J. No. 85.
On April 13, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation
was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.