3405.?Adulteration   and   misbranding   of   nitroglycerin   tablets.     U.   S.   v.
Chicago   Pharmacal    Co.     Plea   of   guilty.     Fine,   $100   and   costs.
(F. & D. No. 3484.    I. S. No.  11245-d.)
On April 26, 1913, the United States attorney for the Northern District of?
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the?
District Court of the United States for said district an information against the?
Chicago Pharmacal Co., a corporation, Chicago, 111., alleging shipment by said?
company in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on July 27, 1911, from the?
State of Illinois into the State of Michigan, of a quantity of nitroglycerin?
tablets which were adulterated and misbranded. Analysis of a sample of the?
product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department showed the presence?
of 0.009 grain nitroglycerin per tablet.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the information for the reason?
that the label borne on the bottle containing the drug product aforesaid repre??
sented to the purchaser that each of the nitroglycerin tablets shipped in the?
bottle aforesaid contained 1/50 of a grain of nitroglycerin, whereas, in truth?
and in fact, the strength of each of the nitroglycerin tablets packed in the?
bottle aforesaid fell below the professed standard under which the drug product?
aforesaid had been sold and shipped, in that each of the nitroglycerin tablets?
contained not to exceed, to wit, 0.009 of a grain of nitroglycerin. It was alleged?
in the information that the product was misbranded in that the bottle contain??
ing it bore a label in words and figures as follows, to wit: " 1000 Tablets 1154?
Nitroglycerin 1/50 gr. Chicago Pharmacal Company, Pharmaceutical Chemists,
622	
BUREAU  OF  CHEMISTRY.	
[July, 1914.
Chicago.", which said statement on the label appearing on the bottle was false?
and misleading, in that said statement represented to the purchaser that each?
of the nitroglycerin tablets contained 1/50 of a grain of nitroglycerin, whereas,?
in truth and in fact, the strength of each of the nitroglycerin tablets packed?
in the bottle aforesaid fell below the professed standard under which the drug?
product aforesaid had been sold and shipped, in that each of the nitroglycerin?
tablets contained not to exceed 0.009 of a grain of nitroglycerin. Misbranding?
was alleged for the further reason that said statement on the label misled and?
deceived the purchaser into the belief that each of the nitroglycerin tablets con??
tained 1/50 of a grain of nitroglycerin, whereas, in truth and in fact, the?
strength of each of the nitroglycerin tablets fell below the professed standard?
under which the product had been sold and shipped as aforesaid, in that each?
of the nitroglycerin tablets contained not to exceed, to wit, 0.009 of a grain?
of nitroglycerin.
On February 13, 1914, the defendant company withdrew its plea of not?
guilty formerly entered and entered its plea of guilty, and the court took the?
case under advisement. On June 5, 1914, the case having come on for final dis??
position, the court imposed a fine of $100 and costs.
D. F. HOUSTON, Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. cr, September 24, 191^.