7383. Adulteration and Misbranding of Big G. V. S. * * * v. 7 Dozen 
Bottles of Big G. Consent decree of condemnation and forfeiture. 
Product   ordered   released   on   ?ond.     (F.   &  D.   No.   10236.    I.   S.   No.
14990-r.     S.   No.   E-1381.) .
On May 12, 1919, 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 the United States for said district a libel for the seizure and 
condemnation of 7 dozen bottles of Big G, consigned by the Evans Chemical Co., 
Cincinnati, Ohio, remaining unsold in the original unbroken packages at Phila- 
delphia, Pa., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about October 18, 
1918, and transported from the State of Ohio into the State of Pennsylvania, 
and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs 
Act, as amended. The article was labeled in part: (Carton, English) "Big G 
A. compound of Borated Goldenseal A remedy for Catarrh, Hay Fever, and 
Inflammations, Irritations or Ulcerations of mucous membranes or Linings of 
the Nose, Throat, Stomach and Urinary OrKans." (Same statements in Frenchj 
Spanish and German.) (Bottle label, English) " Big G >A Non-poisonous 
Tonic * * *. A Treatment for Unnatural Discharges of the urinary organs, 
Catarrh, Hay Fever, and Inflamed, Ulcerated, Itching conditions of the skin 
and mucous membrane or linings of the Mouth, Nose, Throat, Eye and Ear." 
(Booklet, English, page .2) ."Catarrh * *? * chronic, * * * of the head 
*    *    *    hay fever."
Analysis of a sample of the article made in the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department showed that it consisted essentially of an aqueous solution of borax 
and berberine.   No hydrastine was present.
Adulteration of the article was alleged hi the libel for the reason that it 
was labeled on the carton "Compound of Borated Goldenseal," whereas it con- 
tained no borated goldenseal, and its strength and purity fell below the pro- 
fessed standard and quality under which it was sold.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in substance for the reason that the 
carton, bottle, and booklet contained certain statements, designs, and de- 
vices, regarding the curative or therapeutic effects of the article and the in- 
gredients or substances contained therein for the treatment, cure, or preven- 
tion of catarrh, hay fever, inflammations, irritations, or ulcerations of mucous 
membranes or linings of the nose, throat, stomach, and urinary organs, for 
unnatural discharges of the urinary organs, inflamed, ulcerated, itching condi- 
tions of the skin and mucous membrane or linings of the mouth, nose, throat, 
eye and ear, inflammation of the eye, cystitis, gastritis, catarrh of the stom- 
ach, hemorrhoids, piles, throat troubles, gonorrhoea, gleet, chronic gonorrhoea, 
stricture, folliculitis, gonorrhoeal prostatitis, spermatorrhoea, bubo, gonorrhoeal 
cystitis, balanitis, inflammation or swelling of a lymphatic gland of the groin, 
leucorrhoea, whites, catarrh of the vagina, and certain other diseases, which 
were false and fraudulent in that the article would not produce the curative 
or therapeutic effects which purchasers were led to expect by said statements, 
designs, and devices, and which were applied, to the article with a knowledge 
of their falsity for the purpose of defrauding purchasers thereof.
On December 15, 1919, the said Evans Chemical Co., claimant, having con- 
sented to a decree, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it
was ordered by the court that the product be released to said claimant upon the; 
payment of the costs of the proceeclings, and the execution of a bond in the 
sum of $500, in conformity with section 10 of the act..
,  E. D. BALL, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.