19661. Adulteration and Misbranding of magnesium sulphate compound 
capsules, silver nitrate compound capsules, decaphen capsules, 
benzoic acid compound tablets, ammonium salicylate compound 
tablets, and cinchophen tablets. tJ. S. v. S. F. Durst & Co. Fleas of 
guilty. Fines, $300. (F. & D. Nos. 27479, 27519. I. S. Nos. 28783, 29804, 
29805, 29806, 30928, 30952.)
This action was based on the interstate shipment of quantities of drug prepa- 
rations consisting of tablets or capsules containing one or more drugs. The 
labels of all products bore a declaration of the various drugs and the amount 
of each drug alleged to be present in the tablet or capsule. Analyses showed a 
material shortage or excess of one or more of the principal drugs in all of the 
products. The labels of the magnesium sulphate compound tablets and the 
silver nitrate compound tablets also bore unwarranted therapeutic claims. The 
ammonium salicylate compound tablets contained acetphenetidin and failed to 
state on the label that the acetphenetidin is a derivative of acetanilid.
On March 28, 1932, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania, acting upon reports by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of the United States for the district aforesaid two informations 
against S. F. Durst & Co., a corporation, Philadelphia, Pa., charging violation 
of the food and drugs act as amended. The information alleged that on or 
about October 10, October 13, and October 21, and December 5, 1930, the said 
defendant shipped from Pennsylvania into New Jersey quantities of magne- 
sium sulphate compound capsules, silver nitrate compound capsules, and de- 
aden capsules; that on or about April 25, 1931, and April 27, 1931, the said 
defendant had shipped from Pennsylvania into New Jersey quantities of acid 
benzoic compound tablets and cinchophen tablets respectively; and that on or 
about April 9, 1931, the defendant had shipped from Pennsylvania into Mary- 
land a quantity of ammonium salicylate compound tablets; and that the said 
drugs were adulterated and misbranded in violation of the food and drugs act 
as amended. The articles were labeled in part, respectively: " Durst * * * 
Capsules   Magnesium   Sulphate   Comp.    *    *    *    Calomel   %   gr;"   " Durst
* * * Capsules Silver Nitrate Comp. Silver Nitrate *4 gr; " " Durst * * * 
Capsules  Decaphen Cincophen  1  gr.    *    *    *    Amidopyrine  1  gr;"   " Durst
* * * Acid Benzoic Comp. Benzoic Acid 2 gr.;" " Durst * * * Am- 
monium Salicylate Comp. No. 2 Acetphenetidin * * * Ammonium Salicy- 
late % gr.;" "Durst * * * Cincophen 7% grs. * * * Durst & Com- 
pany Manufacturing Pharmacists Philadelphia Pennsylvania."
Adulteration of the articles was alleged in the informations for the reason 
that their strength and purity fell below the professed standard and quality 
under which they were sold, as follows: Each of the magnesium sulphate com- 
pound capsules was represented to contain one-fourth grain of calomel, whereas 
each of said capsules contained not more than 0.213 grain of calomel. Each 
of the silver nitrate compound capsules was represented to contain one-fourth 
grain of silver nitrate, whereas each of said capsules contained more than so 
represented, to wit, not less than 0.405 grain of silver nitrate; each of the 
decaphen capsules was represented to contain 1 grain of cinchophen and 1 grain 
of amidopyrine, whereas each of said capsules contained less of the said drugs 
than so represented, to wit, not more than 0.65 grain of cinchophen and not 
more than 0.78 grain of amidopyrine; each of the acid benzoic compound tablets 
was represented to contain 2 grains of benzoic acid, whereas each of said tablets 
contained more than so represented, to wit, not less than 2.585 grain of benzoic 
acid; each of the ammonium salicylate compound tablets was represented to 
contain % grain of ammonium salicylate, whereas each of said tablets con- 
tained more than so represented, to wit, not less than 0.57 grain of ammonium 
salicylate, i. e., 11 per cent more than labeled; and each of the cinchophen 
tablets was represented to contain 7% grains of cinchophen, whereas each of 
said tablets contained less than so represented, to wit, not more than 6.331 
grains, i. e., five-sixths of the amount of cinchophen stated on the label.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement " Calomel % gr.," 
borne on the label of the bottle containing the magnesium sulphate compound 
capsules, " Silver Nitrate ^ gr.," borne on the label of the bottle containing 
the silver nitrate compound capsules, " Cincophen 1 gr.   *    *    *   Amidopyrine
153138—33 2
1 gr.," borne on the label of the bottle containing the decaphen capsules, 
"Benzoic Acid 2 grs.," borne on the label of the bottle containing the acid 
benzoic compound tablets, "Ammonium Salicylate % gr.," borne on the label 
of the bottle containing the ammonium salicylate compound tablets, and 
" Cincophen 7% grs.," borne on the label of the bottle containing the cinchophen 
tablets, were false and misleading, and for the further reason that the articles 
were labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser, since the 
articles did not contain the said drugs in the amounts declared on the label. 
Misbranding was alleged with respect to the magnesium sulphate compound 
capsules for the further reason that a certain statement appearing on the 
bottle label falsely and fraudulently represented that it was effective as a 
treatment for high blood pressure, whereas it was not; and with respect to 
the silver nitrate compound capsules for the reason that a certain statement 
appearing on the bottle label falsely and fraudulently represented that it was 
effective as a treatment for gastritis, whereas it was not, the products con- 
taining no ingredients or medicinal agents effective to produce the said cura- 
tive and therapeutic effects. Misbranding was alleged with respect to the am- 
monium salicylate compound tablets for the reason that the article contained 
acetphenetidin, a derivative of acetanilide, and the fact that acetphenetidin is 
a derivative of acetanilid was not stated on the label.
On June 13, 1932, a plea of guilty to each information was entered on behalf 
of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $150 in each 
case, a total of $300.
ABTHTJB M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.