5107. MisTforaaaaiiig? of-* lithia/ watex-. TJ, S: * * * v. Hfem-y &*elio-o3fejr*?I?
(COOTsaIiaiw?ls: Iiitlsia, SB-rfMiars Co.)* Blea- of gtfiilty, Fine, $25.?
(?\ &?D. No. 7874,   I. S. No. 5171-fe.)
On October 2, 1916, the United States attorney for the Southern District of?
New York, acting- upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the?
District Court of the United States for' said district an information against?
Henry Schoolbred, trading as the Coppahamik' Lithia Springs Co., New York,?
X. Y., alleging shipment'by said defendant, in violation of the Food and Drugs;?
Act, on July 15, 1915, from the State of New Yorlr into the State of New?
Jersey, of a quantity of lithia water "which was misbranded. The article was?
labeled in parti "Coppahaunlr Lithia Water   *   ?*   * ?
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Ohemistry of this de??
partment showed the following results, expressed as milligrams per liter:
Silica  (SiO,)?^-._~_?-?
?31.7
Sulphuric acid   (SO*)?
Carbonic acid  (COa) : None.
Bicarbonic acid (HC08)?
?244 6
Chlorin   (CI)?
?6 5
Calcium (Ca)?
?76.8
Magnesium  (Mg)?
?1.3
Sodium (Na)  (by difference)?
~~??6.8
389.2
No weighable amount of lithium in 2 liters.
Hypothetical combinations expressed as milligrams per liter:
Sodium chlorid   (NaOl)?
Sodium sulphate  (Na2S04)?_~_,u??.____J.?,???2.5
Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO?)-?-___?
?5.8-
Magnesium bicarbonate (Mg(HOO*)2)?*???_.?
?7.8.
Calcium bicarbonate (Ca(HCOs)2)?-?*__-,_~___.._^_?310/7
Silica  (SiOs)?-?
?31,7
).2.
Misbranding- of the article was alleged in the information for'the rease? that?
the statement, to wit; lithia water, btewre on the* label regarding- it amd the in*?
gredients and substances contained'therein, was false and misleadfcg-inr that?
it indicated that said article-was lithia water;,a?d f?r?the further rmsen that?
the article was labeled as aforesaid -m as 'to deceive ami-mislead purchasers?
into the belief that it was lithia water-, whereas,' ia trtrtb-astfTiif-fact, it was nefe
On November 20, 191B,- the defeattanlr entered a plea of guilty to the informa??
tion, and the-court imposed a fine- of $155.'
CABL" YJBOOMAN, Acting Sevrvttbry op Agrimihirez
130	
BUREAU   OP CHEMISTBY.	
[Supplement 33,