5659.  Misbranding  o* " Sloan's X,inlnxent.?     V.  S.    *     *     *    v.  Br.  Marl   S. 
Sloan (tut:.),  A fed rp oration.     Plea ?It nolo contendere.     Sfiae, $50.
(F. & D. No. T559.    I. S. No. 1804-1.)
On August 28, 1916, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of th*e United States for said district an information against 
Dr. Earl S. Sloan (Inc.), a corporation, doing business at Philadelphia, Pa., 
alleging the offering for sale and the sale by said defendant at the district 
aforesaid, on or about January 3, 1914, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, 
as amended, under a written guaranty that the article was not adulterated 
or misbranded under the Food and Drugs Act, of a quantity of an af tide labeled 
in part, '' Sloan's Liniment," which was a misbranded article within the mean- 
ing of said act, as amended, and which said article, in the Identical condition 
in which received, was shipped by the purchaser thereof, on or about November 
29, 1915, from the State of Pennsylvania into the State of Maryland, in further 
violation of said act.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de- 
partment showed the following results:
Volatile matter by steam distillation-
By volume (per cent) 
, , ,  82
By weight (per cent) . i 
, 81
Solids by direct evaporation (grams per 100 cc) 
1.419
(per cent) 
. 16. 54
Ash: Unweighable.
Specific gravity, 25? 0./25" O - ?.___-, ^        8579
Preparation consists of a reddish liquid containing essentially
turpentine, a light oil having the characteristics of kerosene or coal
oil, oil of sassafras, oleo resin of capsicum with indications of the
presence of pine oil.
It was alleged in substance in the information that the article was mis- 
branded for the reason that certain statements appearing on its labels falsely 
and fraudulently represented it to be effective for killing pain and as a remedy 
for rheumatism, sciatica, sore throat, stiff joints, swellings, tonsilitis, croup, 
enlarged tonsils, enlarged veins, hoarseness, bunions, lameness, proud flesh, 
pleurisy, quinsy, and acute indigestion; and for the further reason that certain 
statements included in the booklet accompanying the article falsely and fraudu- 
lently represented it as a remedy for acute rheumatism, chronic rheumatism, 
croup, hoarseness, la grippe, neuralgia, pleurisy, proud flesh, sore throat, 
sciatica, sprains, stiff joints, tonsilitis and ulcerated teeth, and as effective to 
remove the pain of neuritis and as a treatment of gout, varicose veins of the legs, 
and tapeworm, when, in truth and in fact, it was not.
On December 22, 1916, the defendant company entered a plea of nolo con- 
tendere to the information, and the court imposed a fine of $50.
C. F. MABVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
On OF about September 26, 1916, the United States attorney for the Western 
District of Kentucky, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture 
filed in the District Court of the United States for said district aa taCormatkHf 
against the Cotton Seed Products Co., a corporation, Louisville, Ky., alleging 
shipment by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or1 about 
November 8, 1915, from the State of Kentucky into the State of Indiana, of ar 
quantity of an article labeled in part, " Eagle Brand Cottonseed Meal," which 
was misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this depart- 
ment showed the following results:
Crude fiber (per cent) 
12.4
Crude protein (per cent) , 
38.2
This product contains less crude protein and more crude fiber 
than it is labeled to contain. 
Misbranding of the article was alleged in the information for the reason* 
that the Statement (on the label of the article), to wit, " The Cottonseed Prod- 
ucts Company of Louisville, Ky. Guarantees this Eagle Brand Cottonseed 
Meal to contain not less than * * * 41.0 per cent of crude protein, not 
more than 10.0 per cent of crude fiber * * *," was false and misleading 
in that it represented to the purchaser thereof that the article contained not 
less than 41 per cent of crude protein and not more than 10 per cent of crude 
fiber, and for the further reason that it was labeled as aforesaid' so as to 
deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it contained not less than 
41 per ceht of erude protein and not more than 10 per cent of crude fiber, when, 
in truth and in fact, it contained less than 41 per cent of crude protein and 
more than 10 per cent of crude fiber, to wit, approximately 38 per cent of crude 
protein and approximately 12.4 per cent of crude fiber.
On March 12, 1917, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the 
information, and the court imposed a fine of $25.
C. F. MABVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture,