18695. Adulteration   and   Misbranding of   Lignol   ointment.    IT.    S.   v.   6
Packages of Ligrnol Ointment. Default decree of condemnation, 
forfeiture, and destruction. (F. & D. No. 26360. I. S. No. 16021. S. No. 
4662.)
Examination of the drug product Lignol ointment from the shipments herein 
described having shown that the article was represented to be antiseptic, 
whereas it was not, also that the labeling bore statements representing that 
it possessed curative and therapeutic properties which it did not possess, the 
Secretary of Agriculture reported the matter to the United States attorney tor 
the District of Maryland.
On May 18, 1931, the United States attorney filed in the District Court oi' 
the United States for the district aforesaid a libel praying seizure and con- 
demnation of 6 packages of Lignol ointment, remaining in the original unbroken 
packages at Baltimore, Md., alleging that the article had been shipped by the 
Girard Pharmacal Co., from Philadelphia, Pa., in part on or about December 15, 
1930, and in part on or about January 23, 1931, and had been transported from 
the State of Pennsylvania into the State of Maryland, and charging adultera- 
tion and misbranding in violation of the food and drugs act as amended.
Analysis of a sample of the article by this department showed that it con- 
sisted essentially of petrolatum and a tarry oil. Bacteriological examination 
showed that the article was not antiseptic.
It was alleged in the libel that the article was adulterated in that its strength 
fell below the professed standard of "Antiseptic," under which it was sold.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the following statements appear- 
ing in the labeling of the article were false and misleading: (Carton) "An 
antiseptic ointment;*' (circular) "Lignol has been found to produce results 
in cases requiring a germicide equal to a 1-1000 solution of Bichloride of 
Mercury, or a 1-20 solution of Carbolic Acid, while at the same time it will not 
irritate or harden the tissues, cause vesication or eschar, and is absolutely 
non-poisonous. To quote one of the world's greatest chemists, ' Lignol is a 
natural combination so formed as to be impossible of successful synthetic 
imitation.' From the foregoing the great value of Lignol Ointment can be 
appreciated." Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the follow- 
ing statements appearing in the labeling, regarding the curative or therapeutic 
effects of the article, were false and fraudulent, since it contained no ingredient 
or combination of ingredients capable of producing the effects claimed: (Can) 
" Ointment for the treatment of all forms of skin diseases, Eczema, * * * 
Hemorrhoids, Cuts * * * Erysipelas, Etc.;" (carton) "Ointment for the 
treatment of all forms of skin diseases, Eczema * * * Acne, Hemorrhoids, 
Cuts, * * * Erysipelas, etc.;" (circular) "It has a wonderful influence in 
all forms of skin diseases * * * is exceedingly efficacious in * * * 
inflammations, eruptions of the skin and mucous membrane. It is likewise 
recommended in the treatment of * * * boils * * * burns * * * 
carbuncles, cuts * * * eczema, scabies, erysipelas, vulvitis, etc., etc. 
Felons, fissures * * * hemorrhoids, pimples, pruritis ani or vulvae * * * 
psoriasis, seborrhoea, ulcers and other suppurative conditions."
On June 18, 1931, 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.
ABTHTJB M. HYDE, Secretary of Agricidture.