G005. Misbranding of litbia water. U. S. * * * v.. 8 Cases. of kitliia?
Water. Consent decree of condemnation and forfeitnre? Product?
ordered released on bond.     (P. & D. No. 8441.    I. S. JSfo. 1304-pr    S. No.
E-875.)
On Aiigust 16, 1917, the United States attorney far the District of Connecti??
cut, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District?
Court of the United States for said district a libel for the seizure and condem??
nation of 8 cases of lithia water, remaining unsold in the original unbroken?
packages at Greenwich, Conn., alleging that the article had been shipped on?
or about June 12, 1917, by The Rubino Healing Springs Co., Hot Springs, Va.,?
and transported from the State of Virginia into the State of Connecticut,?
and charging misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended.?
The article was labeled in part, " Rubino Healing Springs Lithia Water?
*    *    *    is beneficial in rheumatism  and  gout."
It was alleged in substance in the libel that the article was mlsbranded for?
the reason that the statement borne on the labels of the bottles, to wit,?
" Lithia Water," was false and misleading in that the bottles contained 0.05?
milligrams of lithium per liter, and did not contain a sufficient quantity of?
lithium to entitle it to be called lithia water,- and for the further reason that?
the statement on the label regarding the article, to wit, " Beneficial in rheu??
matism and gout," was false and fraudulent in that the article contained no?
ingredients or combination of ingredients which rendered it effective as a?
treatment for rheumatism or gout. Misbranding of the article was alleged for?
the further reason that it was in package form, anfi the contents was stated?
in terms of weight, but said weight was not plainly stated on the outside of?
the package.
On December 17, 1917, the said Rubino Healing Springs Co., claimant, hav??
ing consented to a decree, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was en??
tered, and it was ordered by the court that the product should be released to?
said claimant upon the payment of the costs of the proceedings and the execu??
tion of a bond in the sum of $32, in conformity with section 10 of the act.
CAEL VEOOMAN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
N. 3.6001-6050.]     SEEVICE AND EEGULATOEY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	7