5866.  Adulteration and misbranding of chloroform liniment.     U. S.    *    *    * 
v.  J.  Lonis   Kriclc.    Plea  of  guilty,    Fine,  $20.     (F.  &   D.   No.   8430.
I. S. No. 4&19-m.)
On September 27, 1917, the United States attorney for the District of Colum- 
bia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the police 
court of said District an information against J. Louis Krick, Washington, D. C, 
alleging that said defendant did offer for sale and sell at the District aforesaid, 
in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on February 9, 1917, a quantity of 
an article labeled in part, " Chloroform Liniment," which was adulterated and 
misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this depart- 
ment showed the following results:
Alcohol  (per cent by volume) 
54
Chloroform  (mils per 1,000 mils) 
152
(minims per fluid ounce) 
73
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that it was sold under and by a name recognized in the United States Pharma- 
copoeia, and differed from the standard of strength, quality, and purity as 
determined by the tests laid down in the said Pharmacopoeia official at the time 
of investigation of the article, in that in 1,000 mils of the article there were 
152 mils of chloroform, whereas the said Pharmacopoeia provides that in 
1.000 mils of the article there shall be 300 mils of chloroform; and the standard 
of strength, quality, and purity of the article was not declared on the container 
thereof.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement borne on the label 
attached to the bottle, regarding the article and the ingredients and sub- 
stances contained therein, to wit, " alcohol 48%, chloroform 144 min.," was 
false and misleading in that it represented that the article contained 48 per 
cent of alcohol and that each fluid ounce of the article contained 144 minims of 
chloroform, whereas, in truth and in fact, it did not contain 48 pel1 cent of 
alcohol, and each fluid ounce did not contain 144 minims of chloroform, but 
contained more alcohol, and each fluid ounce contained less chloroform, to wit, 
54 per cent of alcohol and 73 minims of chloroform; and for the further rea- 
son that the article contained alcohol and chloroform, and the label failed to 
bear a statement of the quantity or proportion of alcohol and chloroform con- 
tained therein.
On September 27, 1917, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the infor- 
mation, and the court imposed a fine of $20.
CAEL VROOMAN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.