5890.   Misbranding of " Murray's Infallible System Tonic."    V. S.    *    *    *    v.
M.I.S.T.   Co.,   a   corporation.     Plea   of   nolo   contendere.     Fine,   JJ525 
and costs.     (F. & D. No. 5749.    I. S. No. 4505-e.)
On December 8, 1915, the United States attorney for the Northern District 
of Ohio, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis- 
trict Court of the United States for said district an information against the M. 
I. S. T. Co., a corporation, Toledo, Ohio, alleging the sale and delivery by said 
company, on or about January 8, 1913, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, 
as amended, under a guaranty that the articles was not misbranded within the 
meaning of said act, as amended, of a quantity of an article labeled in part, 
" Murray's Infallible System Tonic," which was a misbranded article within the 
meaning of the said act, as amended, and which said article, in'the identical 
condition in which it was received, was shipped by the purchaser thereof, on 
or about January 28, 1913, from the State of Ohio into the State of Missouri, 
in further' violation of said act, as amended.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de- 
partment showed that the product contains mercury (probably in the form of 
calomel), emodin (probably from aloes), licorice, methyl salicylate, and com- 
pounds of iron, calcium, and magnesium. The following were tested for and 
found absent: Arsenic, sulphur, aspirin, and other salicylates, alkaloids, and 
iodids.
It was alleged in substance in the information that the article was mis- 
branded for the reason that certain statements appearing on the wrapper and 
box falsely and fraudulently represented it as an infallible remedy for scrofula 
and catarrh, and affections of the blood, liver, and kidneys, when, in truth and 
in fact, it was not. It was further alleged in substance that the article was 
misbranded for the reason that certain statements included in the circular 
or pamphlet accompanying the article falsely and fraudulently represented 
it as a remedy for cattarrh, asthma, bronchitis, piles, enlargement of the spleen, 
leucorrhea, suppressed menstruation, ulcers, and uterine complaints, when, 
in truth and in fact, it was not.
On November 28, 1917, the defendant company entered a plea of nolo con- 
tendere to the information, and the court imposed a fine of $25 and costs.
CARL VROOMAN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.