9034. Misbranding of  Benetol.   V.   S.   *   *   *   v.   22   Dozen   Packages   *   *   *   of   *   *   *
Benetol.' Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.   (F. & D. No.
11592.   I. S. No. 8186-r.   S, No. C-1580.)
On November 19, 1919, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Illinois, 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 22 dozen packages, more or less, of Benetol, at Chicago, Ill., alleging that the article 
had been shipped on October 8, 1919, by the Benetol Co., Minneapolis, Minn., and 
transported from the State of Minnesota into the State of Illinois, and charging mis- 
branding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department 
showed that it consisted essentially of an.alkaline emulsion of alpha-naphthol, soap, 
glycerin, and traces of alcohol and essential oils.
It was alleged in substance in the libel that the article was misbranded for the 
reason that the following statements regarding the curative and therapeutic effect 
thereof, appearing in the booklet inclosed in each of the cartons inclosing the article, 
to wit, "Men and Women—Will find Benetol a highly efficient douche or injection, 
or local wash, to insure against infection or to quickly check germ diseases. * * * 
Gonorrhea—Take internally twenty drops in hot water after meals and before retiring. 
As injection, irrigation or douche use thirty drops of Benetol per glass of warm water 
or teaspoonf al per pint of warm water. Use at night before retiring. * * * Gleet— 
Start treatment as above and gradually increase injection, etc., to teaspoonful per glass 
of water if necessary," falsely and fraudulently represented the article to be effective 
as a remedy for the several diseases, ailments, and affections mentioned in the booklet 
contained in each of said cartons, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not.
On April 3, 1920, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment of con- 
demnation 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.