7725. Misbranding    of    Santal-Midy    Capsales,     U.    S.    *    *    *    v.    36   Donen
Bottles * * * Santal-Midy Capsules. Decree of condemnation 
and forfeiture. Pvo&tict released nnfler bond. (F. & D. No. 10410. 
I. S   No. 2172-r.     S. No.  W-376.)
On May 27, 1919, the United States attorney for the Southern District of 
California, 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 condemnation 
and forfeiture of 36 dozen bottles of Santal-Midy Capsules, remaining unsold in 
the original unbroken packages at Los Angeles, Calif., alleging that the article 
had been shipped on or about April 5, 1919, by E. Fougera & Co., New York, 
N. Y., and transported from the State of New York into the State of California, 
and charging misbranding under the Food and Drugs Act, as amended.
Analysis of a sample of the product made in the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department showed that it consisted of gelatin capsules containing santal oil.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in substance in the libel for the reason 
that the statements appearing on the labels, regarding the curative and thera- 
peutic effects of the article and of the ingredients and substances contained 
therein, falsely and fraudulently represented that the article was a treatment, 
remedy, and cure for gonorrhoea, gleet, discharges from the urinary organs, 
secretion in gonorrhoea in the acute stage, inflammation of the bladder when the 
bladder walls are inflamed and even when there is hemorrhage, hematuria, 
suppurative nephritis, catarrh of the bladder, chronic catarrh of the bladder, 
vesical catarrh of old age, stricture of the urethra and congestion of the pros- 
tate, acute cystitis when the urine is colored with blood, and inflammation of 
the neck of the bladder, elimination of the uric acid indicated by the red de- 
posit in the urine resembling gravel, and urethral catarrh accompanied by 
cystitis, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not.
On December 3, 1919, E. Fougera & Co., claimant, having consented to a 
decree, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was or- 
dered by the court that the product be released to said claimant upon the pay- 
ment of the costs of said proceedings and the execution of a bond in the sum of 
$250, in conformity with section 10 of the act.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.