25138. Misbranding of white pine and tar compound.    V. S. v. 200 Bottles of
White Pine and Tar Compound.    Default decree of condemnation and 
destruction.     (F. & D. no. 36107.    Sample no. 36685-B.)
This drug preparation was labeled with unwarranted curative and therapeu- 
tic claims, it contained alcohol and chloroform which were not declared on 
the bottle and which were incorrectly stated on the carton, and it was not a 
compound of white pine and tar as was indicated by the name under which 
it was sold.
On August 6, 1935, the United States attorney for the District of Massa- 
chusetts, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 200 bottles of white 
pine and tar compound at Adams, Mass., alleging that the article had been 
shipped in interstate commerce on or about March 4, 1935, by B. R. Elk & 
Co., from Garfield, N. J., and charging misbranding in violation of the Food 
and Drugs Act as amended.
Analysis showed that the article consisted essentially of extracts of plant 
drugs including wild cherry and ipecac, a trace of tar, chloroform (1.15 minims 
per fluid ounce), alcohol (12.2 percent), and water, flavored with sassafras oil.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement, "White 
Pine & Tar Compound", was false and misleading in view of the actual com- 
position of the article. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that 
the statement, "Contains 4 Min. Chloroform Per fl. oz. Alcohol 5%", was false 
and misleading, since the article contained less chloroform and more alcohol 
than stated. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the package 
failed to bear on its label a statement of the quantity or proportion of chloro- 
form and alcohol contained therein, since the bottle label carried no declaration 
and that appearing on the carton was incorrect. Misbranding was alleged for 
the further reason that the statements, "Coughs * * * Bronchitis, * * * ", 
regarding the curative and therapeutic effects of the article, were false and 
fraudulent.
On September 30, 1935, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemna- 
tion was entered and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
W. R. GHEGG, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.