19190. Adulteration and Misbranding of solution citrate of magnesia and 
Citro-Nesia. V. S. v. Citro-Nesia Co. (Inc.). Plea of nolo con- 
tendere. Fine, $440. (F. & D. No. 25690. I. S. Nos. 05056, 05304, 
08358, 08365, 016193, 030709, 030989, 030990, 033728, 033730.)
This case involved 10 separate shipments of solution citrate of magnesia, 
9 of which were labeled as complying with the requirements of the United 
States Pharmacopoeia. One consignment was labeled Citro-Nesia Split. Por- 
tions of the product labeled solution citrate of magnesia were further labeled 
with the trade name Citro-Nesia, described as an improved citrate of mag- 
nesia. The article in 8 of the shipments failed to conform to the requirements 
of the pharmacopoeia, since it contained smaller amounts of magnesium citrate, 
free citric acid, and total citric acid than are specified in the tenth (current) 
revision of the pharmacopoeia, and in those instances in which the product 
was labeled as conforming to the requirements of the ninth revision of the 
pharmacopoeia, its strength fell below the requirements of the ninth revision. 
In the remaining 2 consignments the bottles were found to contain less than 
the declared volume, and in 4 of the other shipments similar shortages were 
found.
On May 19, 1931, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of the United States for the district aforesaid an information 
against the Citro-Nesia Co. (Inc.), a corporation, Chicago, Ill., alleging ship- 
ment by said company in violation of the food and drugs act, of quantities 
of solution citrate of magnesia and Citro-Nesia that were adulterated and 
misbranded. The said shipments were made from the State of Illinois into 
the State of Wisconsin on or about January 4, 1929, June 14, 1929, November 
7, 1929, and January 30 and March 4, 1930; from Illinois into Iowa on or 
about August 10, 1928, September 5', 1929, and January 4 and January 15, 
1930; and from Illinois into Indiana on or about July 26, 1928.
The bottle caps of 9 of the 10 shipments were labeled in part: " Sol. Citrate 
of Magnesia U. S. P. [or " U. S. P. IX]." Portions of the bottles were labeled, 
" Citro-Nesia Solution Citrate of Magnesia " or " Solution Citrate of Magnesia " 
and blown on certain portions of the bottles were the words, " Solution Citrate 
Magnesia " or " Citrate of Magnesia." Portions of the bottles were contained 
in cartons labeled, "Citro-Nesia * * * Citrate of Magnesia, U. S. P." or 
" Solution Citrate of Magnesia U. S. P." One lot of the product was labeled: 
(Bottle cap) "Citro-Nesia;" (bottle label) "Citro-Nesia * * * Split 
* * * An Improved Citrate of Magnesia." Various lots of the article were 
further labeled, " 11 oz." or " 12 oz.," in some instances both weights appearing 
on different portions of the labeling of the same bottle.
It was alleged in the information that the article in 8 of the 10 shipments 
was adulterated in that it was sold under and by a name recognized in the 
United States Pharmacopceia, and differed from the standard of strength, quality, 
and purity as determined by the test laid down in the said pharmacopceia official 
at the time of investigation of the article, since it contained magnesium citrate 
corresponding to less than 1.5 grams of magnesium oxide per 100 cubic centi- 
meters ; it contained free citric acid equivalent to less than 9.5 cubic centi- 
meters of half-normal sodium hydroxide per 10 cubic centimeters of the 
article, and it contained total citric acid equivalent to less than 28 cubic centi- 
meters of half-normal sulphuric acid per 10 cubic centimeters of the article; 
whereas the said pharmacopceia provides that solution of magnesium citrate 
shall contain in each 100 cubic centimeters magnesium citrate correspond- 
ing to not less than 1.5 grams of magnesium oxide; that 10 cubic centi- 
meters thereof shall contain free citric acid equivalent to not less than 9.5 
cubic centimeters of half-normal sodium hydroxide; and that 10 cubic centi- 
meters shall contain total citric acid equivalent to not less than 28 cubic 
centimeters of half-normal sulphuric acid. Adulteration was alleged for the 
further reason that the article differed from the standard laid down in the 
United States Pharmacopoeia, and its own standard of strength, quality, and 
purity was not declared on the container thereof. Adulteration of the said 
8 consignments 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 
fold, since the article in 4 shipments was represented to conform to the pharma- 
copoeia, whereas it did not; the article in 3 shipments was represented to con- 
form to the pharmacopoeia, ninth revision, whereas it did not; and one ship- 
ment was represented to be an improved citrate of magnesia, whereas it 
was not.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to the article in 7 of the said ship- 
ments for the reason that the statements " Sol. Citrate of Magnesia U. S. P.," 
" Citrate of Magnesia U. S. P.," and " Solution Citrate of Magnesia U. S. P. 
IX," borne oh the bottle caps or cartons, were false and misleading in that the 
said statements represented that portions of the article conformed to the 
standard laid down in the United States Pharmacopoeia official at the time of 
investigation, and that portions conformed to the standard laid down in the 
pharmacopoeia, ninth revision; whereas they did not conform to the pharma- 
copoeia official at the time of investigation, and portions that were labeled 
as conforming to the requirements of the ninth revision did not so con- 
form. Misbranding was alleged with respect to the so-called " Citro-Nesia 
Split" for the reason that the statement "An Improved Citrate of Magnesia," 
borne on the bottle label, was false and misleading, since the article was not an 
improved citrate of magnesia. Misbranding was alleged with respect to various 
lots of the article for the reason that the statement, " Contents 12 oz." on the 
labels of some of the shipments, and the statement on the cap, "Min. Cont. 
11 oz.," and on the label, " Contents 12 ounces," (both statements appearing on 
the labeling of the same bottle in certain shipments) were false and misleading,
since the bottles in the said lots contained less than 12 ounces, and in some 
instances contained less than 11 ounces.
On February 10, 1932, a plea of nolo contendere to the information was 
entered on behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of 
$440.
AETHTJR M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.