889. Misbranding: of Crab Orchard concentrated mineral water.    tJ. S. v. Crab
Orchard Mineral Water A Crystal Co., Inc.    Plea of guilty.    Fine, $100
and costs.   (F. D. C. No. 5572.   Sample No. 27448-E.)
The labeling of this product bore false and misleading representations regard-
ing its efficacy in the conditions indicated hereinafter.
On or about August 29, 1942, the United States attorney for the Eastern
District of Kentucky filed an information against Crab Orchard Mineral Water
& Crystal Co., Inc., Crab Orchard, Ky., alleging shipment in the name of L. H.
Goodwin & Co. on or about March 23, 1940, from the State of Kentucky to the
State of Ohio of a quantity of Crab Orchard concentrated mineral water.
Analysis of a sample of this product showed that it contained dissolved
mineral matter, chiefly magnesium and sodium sulfates, with smaller amounts of
other salts.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that statements in the labeling
which represented and suggested that it would be efficacious in the treatment
and alleviation of conditions for which a sojourn at a mineral spring health
resort is customarily prescribed; that it would be efficacious in the relief of in-
veterate chronic diseases and in the treatment of sickness and suffering; that
it would cleanse the system of poisonous toxins and waste matter, and remove
the menaces to health resulting from constipation; that it would be efficacious
In the treatment of diseases originating from disordered liver and kidneys,
and would prevent attacks upon the blood corpuscles by toxins engendered in
the system from defective filtration or cleansing; that it would prevent depletion,
of the nerve cells, and would safeguard beauty in women and keep men fit; that
it would be efficacious in the treatment of constipation, rheumatism, headaches,
influenza, auto-intoxication, sleeplessness, indigestion, and colds, and that it
would keep the blood stream pure, be efficacious for the treatment of skin
blemishes and eruptions, make the complexion youthful, clear, and smooth,
keep the system internally clean, improve the appetite, and enable one to sleep
and feel better, were false and misleading since the article would not be
efficacious for such purposes.
On November 9, 1942, a plea of guilty having been entered on behalf of the
defendant, the court imposed a fine of $100 and costs.