S376. Misbranding of Madame Dean Antiseptic Vaginal Suppositories.?
U. S. * * * v. 6 Dozen Cartons of Madame Dean Antiseptic Va??
ginal Suppositories. Defanlt decree of condemnation, foi*feitui;e,?
and destruction.     (P. & D. No. 11056.    I. S. No. 2041-r.    S. No. W-460.)
On or about August 15, 1919, the United States attorney for the Western?
District of Washington, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture,?
filed in the District Court of the United States for said district a libel for the?
seizure and condemnation of 6 dozen cartons of a product, labeled in part?
" Madame Dean Antiseptic Vaginal Suppositories * * * The United Med??
ical Company, Lancaster, Pa.," remaining in the original unbroken packages at?
Seattle, Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped by Martin Rudy,?
Lancaster, Pa., on March 18, 1919, and transported from the State of Pennsyl??
vania into the State of Washington, and charging misbranding in violation of?
the Food and Drugs Act.
The article was labeled in part, (outside carton and circular) "Madame?
Dean Antiseptic Vaginal Suppositories for the Relief of Vaginitis, Yulvitus,?
Gonorrhceal Inflammation, Leucorrhceal discharge, inflammation, congestion?
and ulceration of the Vagina," (retail carton) "Madame Dean Antiseptic?
Vaginal Suppositories for the relief of Leucorrhcea or whites, Gonorrhoea,-In??
flammation, Congestion, Ulceration and other similar female complaints?
* * *," (booklet, headed "A Friend in Need is a Friend Indeed") "Madame?
Dean Antiseptic Vaginal Suppositories an effectual suppository for the relief?
of Leucorrhcea or whites, Gonorrhoea and similar female complaints."
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed that the suppositories consisted essentially of a salt of?
bismuth, alum, boric acid, tannin, and a trace of powdered plant drug in a?
base of cacao butter.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that the?
statements appearing. on the cartons and in the accompanying booklet and?
circular, regarding its curative and therapeutic effects, were false and fraudu??
lent in that the article did not contain any ingredient or combination of ingredi??
ents capable of producing the effects claimed.
On November 3, 1919, no claimant having appeared for the property, judg??
ment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the?
court that the product be destroyed by the United. States marshal.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.