8044. Misbranding: of Mott's Compound Female Pills. U.'S. * * * v. 12?
Packages + * * of TUotl's Compound Female Pills. Default de??
cree   of   condemnation,   forfeiture,   and   destruction.      (F.   &   D.   No.
3 3457.    I. S. No. 10211-t.    S. No. W-G79.)
On September 3, 1920, the United States attorney for the District of Colo??
rado, 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 con??
demnation of 12 packages of Mott's Compound Female Pills, consigned by the?
Williams Mfg. Co., Cleveland, Ohio, remaining unsold in the original unbroken?
packages at Denver, Colo., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about?
November 1, 1919, and transported from the State of Ohio into the State of?
Colorado, and charging misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act,?
as amended.   The article was labeled in part, " Mott's Compound Female Pills."
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this?
department showed that the pills were composed essentially of aloes, ferrous?
sulphate, and cantharides.
It was alleged in substance in the libel that the article was misbranded for?
the reason that the label thereof and the circular accompanying the same bore?
the following statements regarding the curative and therapeutic effects of said?
article, " Female Pills for irregularity, suppression, painful menstruation, Leu-?
corrhoea and Whites. They restore the menstrual flow * * * In cases of?
Leucorrhoea (the whites), Amenorrhcea (suppressed menses), Menorrhagia?
(immoderate flow of the menses), Dismenorrhoea (painful menstruation) and?
* * *' Nervous and Spinal Affections, Pains in the Back and lower parts?
of the body, Heaviness, Fatigue on Slight Exertion, Palpitation of the Heart,?
Lowness of Spirits, Hysteria, Sick Headache, Giddiness, and all the * * *?
complaints produced by a disordered system * * * In Prolapsus Uteri or?
Uterine Weakness," which statements aforesaid were false and fraudulent in?
that the article contained no ingredient or combination of ingredients capable?
of producing the effects claimed, and was not a cure or remedy for any one of?
the diseases mentioned.
On October 8, 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 Secictary of Agriculture.