24650. Adulteration  and misbranding of camphorated oil.     U.  S. v.  Safe  Owl
Products, Inc.    Plea of guilty.    Fine, $75.    (F. & D. no. 33879.    Sample 
nos. 51663-A, 66318-A.)
This case was based on interstate shipments of camphorated oil the labeling 
of which bore unwarranted curative and therapeutic claims. The product in one 
shipment contained less camphor than the minimum required by the United 
States Pharmacopoeia, and was not labeled to indicate its own standard of 
strength, quality, and purity.
On February 27, 1935, the United States attorney for the Eastern District 
of New York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court an information against the Safe Owl Products, Inc., Brooklyn, 
N. Y., alleging shipment by said company in violation of the Food and Drugs 
Act as amended, on or about January 12, 1933, from the State of New York 
into the State of Pennsylvania, and on or about November 23, 1933, from the 
State of New York into the State of New. Jersey, of quantities of camphorated 
oil that was misbranded, and a portion of which' was also adulterated. One 
lot of the article was labeled in part: "Owl Brand * * * Camphorated 
Oil U. S. P." The remaining lot was labeled in part: "Owl Brand * * * 
Camphorated Oil Not U. S. P." 
Analysis showed that the lot labeled "U. S. P." contained 19.2 percent of 
camphor, and that the lot labeled "Not U. S. P." contained 15.8 percent of
camphor, which was below the minimum tolerance of not less than 19 percent 
of camphor provided by the United States Pharmacopoeia for camphorated oil.
The lot labeled, "Camphorated Oil Not U. S. P.", was alleged to be adulterated 
in that it was sold under a name recognized in the United States Pharmacopoeia, 
and differed from the standard of strength, quality, and purity as determined 
by the test laid down in the said pharmacopoeia, since it yielded less than 
19 percent, namely, not more than 15.8 percent of camphor; whereas the United 
States Pharmacopoeia provides that the product should yield not less than 
19 percent of camphor, and the standard of strength, quality, and purity of 
the article was not declared on the container thereof.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to both lots for the reason that certain 
statements regarding the therapeutic and curative effects of the article, appear- 
ing on the bottle label, falsely and fraudulently represented that it was effective 
as a treatment, remedy, and cure for rheumatism and swelling of breast and 
joints.
On April 3, 1935, a plea of guilty was entered on behalf of the defendant 
company and the court imposed a fine of $75.
W. R. GBEGG, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.