NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 2431.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Pood and Drugs Act.)
U.    S.   v.   Ernest   L.   Robey.      Plea   of   guilty   to   charge    of   adulteration. 
Fine, $5.     Charge  of misbranding- nolle pressed.
ADULTEEATION  AND ALLEGED MISBRANDING  OF  TINCTURE  OF
IODINE.
On January 25. 1913, the United States Attorney for the District 
of Columbia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, 
filed in the Police Court of said District an information against 
Ernest L. Robey, trading under the name and style of Robey's Phar- 
macy, Washington, D. C., alleging the sale by said defendant, at the 
District aforesaid, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on June 
12, 1912, of a quantity of tincture of iodine which was adulterated 
and misbranded. The product was labeled: (On bottle) " Tinct. 
Iodine, U. S. P. Poison (Skull and cross bones) Poison contain- 
ing 90% absolute alcohol by volume. Antidote: Emetics, and fol- 
low with drinks of Flour or Starch in water; Milk. Robey's Phar- 
macy, Successor to A. J. Shafhirt, Cor. NT. Capitol & H St., N. W., 
Washington, D. C." (Blown in bottle) " Robey's Pharmacy, North 
Capitol & H St., N. W., Washington, D. C."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry 
of this Department showed the following results: Iodine (grams per 
100 cc), 5.09; potassium iodide (per 100 cc), only a trace; alcohol, 91 
per cent. Adulteration of the product was alleged in the informa- 
tion for the reason that it was offered for sale and sold under and by 
a name, to wit, tincture of iodine, which name was recognized in the 
United States Pharmacopoeia official at the time of the investigation, 
and said drug differed from the standard of strength and purity as 
determined by the test laid down in said Pharmacopoeia.    Misbrand-
95932°—No. 2431—13
ing was alleged for the reason that the product was branded and 
labeled so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser, in that the label 
on the bottle bore the words and phrase " Tinct. Iodine," meaning and 
importing to the purchaser thereof that the product was a tincture of 
iodine, conforming to the standard set forth in the United States 
Pharmacopoeia, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not.
On January 25, 1913, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the 
first count of the information, charging adulteration, and the court 
imposed a fine of $5. A nolle prosequi was entered as to the second 
count of the information, charging Misbranding of the product.
B. T. GALLOWAY, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture. 
WASHINGTON, D. G., May 16,1913.
2431
o