19505. Adulteration and Misbranding of fluidextract  of ginger.    IT.   S.  v.
Ellc  Manufacturing  Co.     Plea   of  guilty.     Fine,  $50.     (F.   &  D.   No.
26576.    I. S. No. 030572.)
This case was based on the interstate shipment of a quantity of fluidextract 
•of ginger which was represented to conform to the requirements of the United 
States Pharmacopoeia. Samples examined were found to contain rosin and 
phenolic compounds, which are not normal constituents of fluidextract of 
ginger, and also were found to contain less alcohol than declared on the label.
On August 27, 1931, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Tennessee, 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 Elk Manufacturing Co., a corporation, Jellico, Tenn., alleging 
shipment by said company, in violation of the food and drugs act, on or about 
February 3, 1930, from the State of Tennessee into the State of Georgia, of a 
quantity of fluidextract of ginger that was adulterated and misbranded. The 
article was labeled in part: (Bottle) "Fluid Extract Ginger U. S. P. Alcohol 
83 percent By Volume   *    *    *   Distributed by Elk Mfg. Co. Jellico, Tenn."
It was alleged in the information that the article was adulterated in that 
it was sold under and by a name recognized in the United States Pharmacopoeia 
and differed from the standard of strength, quality, and purity as determined 
"by the test laid down in the said pharmacopoeia official at the time of investiga- 
tion, since it contained rosin and phenolic compounds which are not mentioned 
in the pharmacopoeia as constituents of fluidextract of ginger, and the standard 
of strength, quality, and purity of the article was not declared on the con- 
tainer thereof. 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, since it was represented to conform to the United 
States Pharmacopoeia and to contain 83 per cent by volume of alcohol, whereas 
it did not conform to the test laid down in the pharmacopoeia, and contained 
less than 83 per cent of alcohol by volume, namely, 76.55 per cent of alcohol 
by volume.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, " Fluid Extract 
Ginger U. S. P." and "Alcohol 83 percent By Volume," appearing on the label, 
were false and misleading, since the article was not fluidextract of ginger 
which conformed to the standard prescribed by the pharmacopoeia, and con- 
tained less than 83 per cent of alcohol. Misbranding was alleged for the 
further reason that the label of the article failed to bear a statement of the 
•quantity and proportion of alcohol contained in the article, since the statement 
made was incorrect. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the 
article was composed in part of rosin and phenolic compounds prepared in 
imitation of fluidextract of ginger U. S. P., and was offered for sale and sold 
under the name of another article, namely, fluidextract of ginger, U. S. P.
On February 4, 1932, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on 
behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $50.
ABTHUE M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.