19374. Adulteration and Misbranding of Acco-balm. XI. S. v. 55 Large 
Packages, et al., of Acco-balm. Default decree of condemnation, 
forfeiture, and destruction. (F. & D. No. 26466. I. S. No. 30516. S. No. 
4726.)
Examination of the drug product Acco-balm having shown that the article 
was represented to be antiseptic, whereas it was not, also that the labeling 
contained unwarranted curative and therapeutic claims, the Secretary of 
Agriculture reported the matter to the United States attorney for the District 
of Massachusetts.
On June 5, 1931, the United States attorney filed in the District Court of the 
United States for the district aforesaid a libel praying seizure and condemna- 
tion of 55 large packages and 40 small packages of the said Act-balm, 
remaining in the original unbroken packages at Boston, Mass., alleging that the 
article had been shipped by the A. C. Clark Co. (Inc.), from Brattleboro, Vt., 
in part on or about April 18, 1931, and in part on or about May 12, 1931, and 
had been transported from the State of Vermont into the State of Massachu- 
setts, and charging adulteration 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 zinc oxide, boric acid, and a trace of an essential oil 
incorporated in a petrolatum base. Bacteriological examination showed that 
the article was not antiseptic.
It was alleged in the libel that the article was adulterated in that it was 
sold under the following standard of strength, namely, antiseptic, and its 
strength fell below such professed standard, since it was not antiseptic.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement on the can label, 
"Anti-Septic," was false and misleading when applied to an article that was 
not antiseptic. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the 
statement on the can label, " For Injuries and Ailments," and on the carton, 
" Is a general curvative," were statements regarding the curative or therapeutic 
effects of the article, and were false and fraudulent, since it contained no 
ingredient or combination of ingredients capable of producing the effects 
claimed.
On August 17, 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.
ARTHUR M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.