12065. Adulteration   and   misbranding1   of   soluble   saccharin.     IT.    S.   v.   2
Boxes of Allegrcd Saccharin. Default decree of condemnation, 
forfeiture, and destruction. (F. & D. No. 11245. I. S. No. 7106-r. 
S. No.  C-1464.)
On October 1, 1919, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Texas, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis- 
trict Court of the United States for said district a libel praying the seizure 
and condemnation of 2 boxes, 5 pounds each, of alleged saccharin, at Dallas, 
Tex., alleging that the article had been shipped by the Sethness Co., from 
Chicago, Ill., on or about July 30, 1918, and transported from the State of 
Illinois into the State of Texas, and charging adulteration and misbranding 
in violation of the Food and Drugs Act. The article was labeled in part: 
" Cosco Guaranteed Under The Food And Drugs Act * * * Sethness Com- 
pany Chicago, U. S. A. Est. 1884 Cosco Brand Soluble Saccharine."
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the libel for the reason that it 
was sold under and by a name recognized by the United States Pharmacopoeia 
and National Formulary, and differed from the standard of strength, quality, 
and purity as determined by the test laid down in said Pharmacopoeia and 
Formulary, official at the date of investigation. Adulteration was alleged for 
the further reason that the strength and purity of the article fell below the 
professed standard and quality under which it was sold.
Misbranding was alleged in substance for the reason that the label, " Guaran- 
teed Under The Food And Drugs Act. * * * Soluble Saccharine," was false, 
untrue, and misleading in that the said statement represented that the article 
was soluble saccharin and was guaranteed under the terms of the Food and 
Drugs Act, whereas it was not soluble saccharin as defined by the tests laid 
down in the United States Pharmacopoeia and Formulary, and the strength and 
purity of the said article fell below the professed standard and quality of solu- 
ble saccharin.   Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the article
-was an imitation of and was offered for sale under the distinctive name of 
another article, namely, soluble saccharin.
On March 3, 1922, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment 
of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court 
that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
HOWAED M. GOKE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.