22351. Adulteration and misbranding of Dnnlop Pyorrhea Paste and Dun- 
lop's Ethyl Borate. IT. S. v. Julius F. Emme (Emme Dental 
Specialty Co.). Plea of guilty. Fine, $30. (F. & D. no. 27534. I. S. 
nos. 28789, 28790.)
Examination of the drug preparations involved in this case showed that they 
contained no ingredients or combinations of ingredients capable of producing 
certain curative and therapeutic effects claimed in the labeling. Analyses 
showed that the articles contained less alcohol than declared and that the 
alleged " ethyl borate" was not ethyl borate. Tests of the alleged ethyl 
borate showed that it did not possess the antiseptic properties claimed.
On April 3, 1934, the United States attorney for the District of Minnesota, 
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the district court 
an information against Julius F. Emme, trading with others as the Emme 
Dental Specialty Co., St. Paul, Minn., alleging shipment by said defendant on 
or about May 19, 1931, from the State of Minnesota into the State of Mary- 
land, of quantities of Dunlop Pyorrhea Paste and Dunlop's Ethyl Borate 
which were adulterated and misbranded.
Analyses of samples of the articles by this Department showed that the 
pyorrhea paste was an opaque semifluid consisting essentially of boric acid, 
glycerin, alcohol, and oil of peppermint; and that the ethyl borate consisted 
essentially of an aqueous solution of boric acid, with odor of oil of peppermint, 
and a small amount of alcohol. Tests of the ethyl borate showed that it was 
not an antiseptic when used as directed.
It was alleged in the information that the pyorrhea paste was adulterated 
in that its strength and purity fell below the professed standard and quality 
under which it was sold, since it was represented to contain 20 percent of 
alcohol, whereas it contained not more than 4.17 percent of alcohol.
Adulteration of the ethyl borate was alleged for the reason that its strength 
and purity fell below the professed standard and quality under which it was 
sold, in that it was represented to be an antiseptic when used as directed, 
it was represented to be ethyl borate, and it was represented to contain about 
7 percent of alcohol; whereas it was not an antiseptic when used as directed, 
it was not ethyl borate, and it contained less than 7 percent of alcohol, namely, 
not more than 0.55 percent of alcohol.
Misbranding of both products was alleged for the reason that the statement, 
" 20% alcohol", with respect to the Dunlop Pyorrhea Paste, and the statements, 
" not over 7% alcohol", " a mild but powerful antiseptic ", " ethyl borate ", and 
" antiseptic mouth wash ", with respect to the ethyl borate, were false and 
misleading. Misbranding was alleged with respect to both products for the 
further reason that they contained alcohol and the labels failed to bear a 
statement of the quantity or proportion of alcohol contained therein.
Misbranding of the ethyl borate was alleged for the further reason that it 
was an aqueous solution of boric acid and was offered for sale under the name 
of another article.
Misbranding of the pyorrhea paste was alleged for the further reason that 
certain statements, designs, and devices regarding the curative and therapeutic
93897—34 1 
175
effects of the article falsely and fraudulently represented that it was effective 
as a treatment of pyorrhea and mouth diseases; effective to insure healthy ' 
teeth; effective as a preventive of infection; effective to give quick relief in 
all cases to gum and tissue diseases and to greatly retard the advancement of 
these infections; effective as a treatment, remedy, and cure for trench mouth 
or Vincent's disease; and effective to neutralize and discharge all poisonous 
matter that accompanies trench mouth or Vincent's disease.
Misbranding of the ethyl borate was alleged for the further reason that 
certain statements, designs, and devices regarding the curative and therapeutic 
effects of the article, appearing in the labeling, falsely and fraudulently repre- 
sented that it was effective as a treatment for pyorrhea and pus diseases; 
effective as a treatment for trench mouth, canker sores, and all other mouth 
and gum diseases; effective as a treatment for purulent alveolitis, bleeding and 
spongy gums; effective to keep the tissues of the mouth and throat in a healthy 
condition; effective as a treatment for sore throat and tonsilitis, cuts and 
wounds; and effective to keep the gums firm.
On April 7,1934, the defendant entered a plea of guilty, and the court imposed 
xi fine of $30.
M. L. WILSON", Acting Secretary of Agriculture.