714. Misbranding of Spicer's Compound, TJ. S. v. 117 Bottles of Spicer's Com-
pound.    Default decree of condemnation and destruction.     (F. D. C. No.
6966.    Sample No. 71519-E.)
This product was a laxative and its labeling failed to bear the required laxa-
tive warnings, failed to declare the strychnine and belladonna alkaloids present,
failed to name the principal physiologically active ingredient under its common
or usual name, and also bore false and misleading curative and therapeutic
claims.
On March 2, 1942, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of
Missouri filed a libel against 117 bottles of Spicer's Compound at St. Louis, Mo.,
alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about
October 22, 1941, and January 21, 1942, by the Charles B. Spicer Co. from
Memphis, Tenn.; and charging that it was misbranded.
Analysis showed that the article consisted essentially of a solution of Epsom
salt (approximately 25 percent) with relatively small proportions of extracts
of plant drugs including laxative plant drugs, and a small proportion of an
iron salt, sweetened with saccharin and preserved with sodium benzoate.
The article was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that its labeling failed to
bear adequate warnings against use in those pathological conditions where its
use might be dangerous to health and against unsafe duration of administration
in such manner and form as are necessary for the protection of users, since the
statement on the label, "Caution-In case of severe abdominal pain, do not take
a laxative" was not adequate to warn the purchaser against the use of the
article in case of abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, or other symptoms of
appendicitis and did not warn the purchaser that frequent or continual use of
the article might result in dependence upon laxatives to move the bowels; (2)
in that the following statements in the labeling "Spicer's Compound * * *
to aid in the relief of simple headache, heartburn, biliousness, sour stomach, gas
in stomach and intestines due to occasional constipation" were misleading since
they failed to reveal the material fact that the conditions mentioned are usually
due to causes other than occasional constipation and that the article was not a
treatment for such conditions when due to such other causes; (3) in that the
statements, "Contains: Nux-Vomica 1.8 min. to ounce.   Belladonna .45 min. to
ounce Herbs-including Senna, Buchu, Juniper Berries, Rhubarb, Jalap; Mag-
nesium Sulphate, Cascara, & Iron (Ferric Chloride)," were misleading since ("-
they failed to reveal the fact that the physiological effects of the article were
due essentially to its content of Epsom salt (magnesium sulfate), senna, and
cascara sagrada; (4) in that the label failed to bear the common or usual name
of each active ingredient, since magnesium sulfate is not the common or usual
name of Epsom salt; and (5) in that its label failed to bear the name and
quantities or proportions of strychnine, atropine, hyoscine, and hyoscyamine that
were present.
On March 28, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation
was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.