7563. Misbranding of Texas Wonder. V. ?. * * * v. SG Bottles of Texas 
"Wonder. XJefanlt decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destrnc- 
tion.     (F. & D. No. 11650.    I. S. No. 91S8.    S. No. C-1621.)
On December 16, 1919, the United States attorney for the Northern District 
of Alabama, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of the United States for said district a libel, and on February 
21, 1920, an amendment thereto, for the seizure and condemnation of 36 
bottles of Texas Wonder, remaining unsold in the original unbroken packages 
at Birmingham, Ala., alleging that the article had been shipped on October 1, 
1919, by E. W. Hall, St. Louis, Mo., and transported from the State of Missouri 
into the State of Alabama, and charging misbranding in violation of the Food 
and Drugs Act, as amended. The article was labeled in part: (Carton) 
" Texas Wonder A Remedy for Kidney and Bladder Troubles, Weak and Lame 
Backs, Rheumatism and Gravel. Regulates Bladder Trouble in Children; " 
(circular) "The Texas Wonder * * * has been employed with success in 
* * * Diabetes * * *;" (testimonial of D. Johnson) "* * * he was 
advised by his physicians that he had diabetes, his urine showing IS per cent
sugar. He took the treatment for a year or more and got all right; (testimonial 
of Louis A. Portner, St. Louis, Mo.) " * * * began using the Texas Wonder 
for stone in the kidneys, inflammation of the bladder and tuberculosis of the 
kidneys * * *. His urine contained 40% pus. * * * was still using the 
medicine with wonderful results, and his weight had increased   *   *    *."
Analysis of a sample of the article made in the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department showed that it consisted essentially of copaiba, rhubarb, turpen- 
tine, guaiac, and alcohol.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in substance in the libel for the 
reason that the foregoing statements, appearing on the labels and included in 
the circular accompanying the article, regarding the curative and therapeutic 
effects thereof, were false and fraudulent in that the article contained no in- 
gredient or combination of ingredients capable of producing the effects 
claimed for it.
On March 22, 1920, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment 
of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court 
that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.