SOSl. Adulteration and misbranding- of acetanilid co. tablets. TJ. S.?
* * * v. 20 Boxes of Acetanilid Co. Tablets. Default decree of?
condemnation, forfeitui-e, and destruction. (P. & D. No. 9559. I. S.?
No.  16038-r.     S. No. E-1194.)
On December 31, 1918, the United States attorney for the Northern District?
of Georgia, 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 a certain quantity of a certain article, labeled in part "Acetani??
lid Co. Tablets," remaining unsold in the original unbroken packages at Atlanta,?
Ga., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about October 15, 1918, by?
Chas. Huisking Co., Brooklyn, N. Y., and transported from the State of New?
York into the State of Georgia, and charging adulteration and misbranding in?
violation of the Food and Drugs Act. The article was labeled "Acetanilid Co.?
Tablets 2,500 (5 gr.)    Verandah Chemical Co. Brooklyn, N. Y."
Analysis of a sample by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department showed?
that the article contained an average of 0.263 grain of acetanilid per tablet.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel in that it was sold under?
and by a name recognized in the United States National Formulary, to wit,?
"Acetanilid Tablets," and differed from the standard of strength, quality, and?
purity as determined by the tests laid down in the United States National Formu??
lary, in that the article did not contain the quantity of acetanilid prescribed by?
the said National Formulary but contained a less quantity, only 0.263 grain?
of acetanilid. Further adulteration was alleged in that the strength and purity?
of the article fell below the professed standard and quality under which it was?
sold, in that it contained only 0.263 grain of acetanilid.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in that the statements on the label on?
the package containing the article, regarding the article, to wit, "Acetanilid Co.?
Tablets (5 gr.)," was false and misleading in that it represented to the purchaser
N. J. 8051-8100]      SERVICE AND KEGULATOBY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	65
that each tablet contained the quantity of acetanilid prescribed by the United?
States National Formulary, whereas, in truth and in fact, each tablet did not?
contain the quantity of acetanilid prescribed by the Formulary, but contained?
a less amount, to wit, 0.263 grain of acetanilid per tablet. Further mis??
branding was alleged in that the article was sold as an imitation of and was?
offered for sale under the.name of "Acetanilid Tablets (5 gr.)," whereas, in truth,?
the article did not contain 5 grains of acetanilid per tablet, but contained only?
0.263 grain of acetanilid per tablet. Further misbranding was alleged in?
that the package containing acetanilid failed to bear a statement on the label?
thereof of the quantity or proportion of acetanilid contained in the tablets.
On June 24, 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.