27379. Misbranding of rubbing alcohol compound.     IT. S. v. 17% Dozen Bottles
of Rubbing Alcohol Compound.    Default decree of condemnation and 
destruction.    (F. & D. no. 37126.    Sample no. 50492-B.)
This product consisted essentially of isopropyl alcohol and water with traces 
of borax. Its label, however, bore the conspicuous statement "Rubbing Alcohol 
Compound", a name which conveyed the impression that it was made from 
ordinary ethyl alcohol, and this impression was not corrected by the relatively 
inconspicuous statement of the presence of isopropyl alcohol. The percentage 
of isopropyl alcohol was not declared on the label.
On January 29, 1936, the United States attorney for the District of Con- 
necticut, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 17% dozen bottles 
of rubbing alcohol compound at Bridgeport, Conn., alleging that the article had 
been shipped in interstate commerce by Best Value Sales Co., Inc., from New 
York, N. Y., and charging misbranding in violation of the Food and Drugs Act. 
It was labeled in part: "Rubbing Alcohol Compound * * * Certified Rx 
Laboratories New York—Chicago."
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement "Rubbing 
Alcohol Compound", borne on the bottle label, was false and misleading when
applied to an article containing isopropyl alcohol, water, and boric acid, since 
it created the impression that the article was made from ordinary (ethyl) 
alcohol and this impression was not corrected by the relatively inconspicuous 
statement on the label, "The contents herein contained is prepared from 
Isopropyl Alcohol (CH3CHOHCH3). This preparation does not contain Ethyl 
Alcohol (C3H50H). If taken internally will cause violent gastric disturbances." 
The article was alleged to be misbranded further in that the package failed 
to bear upon its label a statement of the quantity or proportion of isopropyl 
alcohol contained therein, since the statement "Isopropyl Alcohol 70 Proof" was 
meaningless.
On June 24, 1937, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation 
was entered and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
M. L. "WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.