3523. Adulteration and misbranding of granular pepsin, pepsin soluble scales, powdered pep??
sin, and pancreatin. U. S. v. S. E. Uliman (Royal Chemical Co.). Plea of npn vult..?
Fine, $50 on count 1 of information. Sentence suspended on remaining 7 counts of?
information.   (?. & D. No. 5430.   I. S. Nos. 5690-e, 5691-e, 5692-e, 5693-e.)
On April 14, 1914, the United States attorney for the District of New Jersey, acting?
upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United?
States for said district an information in 8 counts against S. E. Ullman, trading as the?
Royal Chemical Co., Jersey City, N. J., alleging shipment by said defendant, in vio??
lation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about November 25, 1912, from the State of?
New Jersey into the State of Tennessee, of quantities of granular pepsin, scale pepsin^?
powdered pepsin, and pancreatin which were adulterated and misbranded.
The granular pepsin was labeled: "10 lbs. Granular Pepsin Soluble 1-3000 U. S. P_?
Royal Chemical Co., New York City."
Examination of a sample of this product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this depart??
ment showed that it was not capable of digesting more than 1,875 times its own weight?
of freshly coagulated and disintegrated egg albumen.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the first count of the information for the?
reason that it was sold imder and by a name recognized in the United States Phar??
macopoeia, to wit, granular pepsin, and differed from the standard of strength, quality,?
and purity for such article as determined by the test laid down in said Pharmacopoeia?
official at the time of investigation, in that said Pharmacopoeia specifies that said?
article shall be capable of digesting 3,000 times its own weight in [of] freshly coagulated?
and disintegrated egg albumen, whereas, in truth and in fact, said article was not?
capable of digesting more than 1,875 times its own weight of freshly coagulated and?
disintegrated egg albumen. Misbranding of the product was alleged in the second?
count of the information for the reason that the statement "Granular Pepsin Soluble?
1-3000 U.S.P.," borne on the label, was false and misleading, because it conveyed the?
impression that the product was pure granular pepsin, conforming to the standard?
prescribed in the United States Pharmacopoeia, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was?
not granular pepsin of the standard prescribed in the United States Pharmacopoeia,?
but was a granular pepsin of a lower standard than that specified in said Pharmacopoeia.
The scale pepsin was labeled: "28 lbs. Pepsin Soluble Scales 1-3000 U.S.P. Royal?
Chemical Co., New York City." Examination of a sample of this product by said?
Bureau of Chemistry showed that it was not capable of digesting more than 1,150?
times its own weight of freshly coagulated and disintegrated egg albumen.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the third count of the information for?
the reason that it was sold under and by a name recognized in the United States Phar??
macopoeia, to wit, pepsin soluble scales, and different from the standard of strength,?
quality and purity for such article, as determined by the test laid down in said Phar??
macopoeia official at the time of investigation, in that said Pharmacopoeia specifies?
that said article shall be capable of digesting 3,000 times its own weight in [of] freshly?
coagulated and disintegrated egg albumen, whereas, in fact, said article was not?
capable of digesting more than 1,150 times its own weight of freshly coagulated and?
disintegrated egg albumen. Misbranding was alleged in the fourth count of the?
information for the reason that the statement, "Pepsin Soluble Scales 1-3000 U.S.P.,"?
borne on the label of said article, was false and misleading because it conveyed the?
impression that the product was pepsin soluble scales conforming to the standard?
prescribed in the United States Pharmacopoeia, whereas, in truth and in fact, it?
was not pepsin soluble scales of the standard as set forth in said Pharmacopoeia but?
was pepsin soluble scales of a lower standard [of] strength than that prescribed in said?
Pharmacopoeia.
81697"?15?4
26	
BUREAU   OP  CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 1.
The powdered pepsin was labeled: "17| lbs. Pepsin Soluble Powdered 1-3000?
U.S.P. Royal Chemical Co., New York City." Examination of a sample of this?
product by said Bureau of Chemistry showed that it was not capable of digesting more?
than 750 times its own weight of freshly coagulated and disintegrated egg albumen.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the fifth count of the information for?
the reason that it was sold under and by a name recognized in the United States?
Pharmacopoeia, to wit, pepsin soluble powdered, and differed from the standard of?
strength, quality, and purity for such article as determined by the test laid down in?
said Pharmacopoeia official at the time of investigation, in that said Pharmacopoeia?
specifies that said article shall be capable of digesting 3,000 times its own weight in?
[of] freshly coagulated and disintegrated egg albumen, whereas, in truth and in fact,?
said article was not capable of digesting more than 750 times its own weight of freshly?
coagulated and disintegrated egg albumen. Misbranding was alleged in the sixth?
count of the information for the reason that the statement, "Pepsin Soluble Powdered?
1-3000 U.S.P.," borne on the label, was false and misleading because it conveyed the?
impression that the product was soluble powdered pepsin conforming to the standard?
prescribed in the Uhited States Pharmacopoeia, whereas, in truth and in fact, it?
was not a soluble powdered pepsin conforming to said standard, but was a soluble?
powdered pepsin of a lower standard than that prescribed in said Pharmacopoeia.
The pancreatin was labeled- "15| lbs. Pure Pancreatine U.S.P. 1900 Abso??
lutely Free From Fatty Matter Royal Chemical Co., New York City." Examina??
tion of a sample of this product by the said Bureau of Chemistry showed that it was?
not capable of converting more than two-fifths of its own weight of starch into sub??
stances soluble in water.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the seventh count of the information?
for the reason that it was sold under and by a name recognized in the United States?
Pharmacopoeia, to wit, pancreatin, and differed from the standard of strength, quality,?
and purity for such article, as determined by the test laid down in said Pharmacopoeia?
official at the time of investigation, in that said Pharmacopoeia specifies that said?
article shall be capable of converting not less than 25 times its own weight of starch?
into substances soluble in water, whereas, in truth and in fact, said article was not?
capable of converting more than two-fifths of its own weight of starch into substances?
soluble in water. Misbranding was alleged in the eighth count of the information?
for the reason that the statement, "Pure Pancreatine U.S.P.," borne on. the label of?
said article, was false and misleading because it conveyed the impression that the?
product was pure pancreatin, conforming to the standard prescribed in the United?
States Pharmacopoeia, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not pure pancreatin con??
forming to said standard, but pancreatin of a lower standard than that prescribed?
in said Pharmacopoeia.
On June 9, 1914, the defendant entered a plea of iron vult to the information and?
was fined $50 upon the first count thereof. The court suspended sentence on the?
other seven counts of the information.
CARL VROOMAN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, January 18, 1915.
N, J. 8501-3550.]    SEEVICE AND BEGULATOBY ANNOUNCEMENTS.