6750.?Misbranding- of Peru's Swine-Lixir.    U. S.    *    *    *   v. 2 Cases    *    *    *
of Perry's Swine-JLixir. Default decree Of condemnation, forfei-l?
ture, and destruction. (P. & D. No. 9118. I. g. No. 1744-r/. S. No;?
E-1057.)
On July 6, 1918, the United States attorney for the Southern District of?
Florida, 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?
condemnation of 2 eases, each containing one dozen bottles of Pevrry's Swine-?
Lixir, consigned by the Swine Elixir Mfg. Co., Moultrie, Ga.-, remaining unsold?
ill the original unbroken packages at] Jacksonville, Fla.. alleging that the?
article had been shipped on or about May 4, 1918, anil transported from the?
State of Georgia into the State 6f Florida, and charging misbranding in viola-?
lion of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended. The article was labeled, in part,?
"Pe
rrj 's Sw'ine-Lixir."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed that it was composed of Sulphuric acid, oil of turpentine, iron?
bxid, and water.
Misbranding of the article was alleged for the reason that the label on the?
bottles bore statements regarding the curative and therapeutic effect of the?
article which were false and misleading; that is to Say, the labels on the bottles?
contained the false statements, "A remedy for hog troubles. Perry's Swine?
Lixir + *? * is especially recommended for hog cholera in every form?
*    *?If this medicine is given according to our directions there will be
no reason for stock raisers to lose any hogs by reason of general sickness or'?
disease * * * " whereas said statements, borne on the labels of the bot??
tles with reference to the curative and therapeutic effect of the article, were?
false and fraudulent in that it contained no ingredient or combination of in??
gredients capable of producing the therapeutic effect claimed for it.
On December 19, 1918, no claimant having appeared for the property, judg??
ment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the-?
court that the product should be destroyed by the United States marshal.
J. R. RIGGS, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
3. E. A.—Chem. Suppl. 6G.