22965. Misbranding of Wonder Overhaul Tonic. C. S. v. 78 Bottles of 
"Wonder Overhaul Tonic. Default decree of condemnation, for- 
feiture, and destruction.     (F. & D. no. 32512.    Sample no. 67536-A.)
This case involved a drug preparation, the labeling of which bore unwar- 
ranted curative and therapeutic claims. It was also claimed for the article 
that it would produce no ill effects and was safe and harmless, whereas it 
contained an ingredient that might be harmful. The article contained unde- 
clared alcohol.
On April 6, 1934, the United States attorney for the District of New Jersey, 
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the district 
court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 78 bottles of Wonder Overhaul 
Tonic at Newark, N. J., alleging that the article had been shipped in inter- 
state commerce, on or about January 16, 1929, by the Fulton Health Institute, 
from Brooklyn, N. Y., and charging misbranding in violation of the Food and 
Drugs Act as amended.
Analysis showed that the article consisted essentially of sodium salicylate 
(1.6 grams per 100 milliliters), sodium bicarbonate (2.5 grams per 100 milli- 
liters), extract of plant drugs including a laxative drug, glycerin, alcohol 
(1.1 percent by volume), and water, flavored with peppermint oil.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the following statements 
in the labeling were false and misleading: (Carton) "Has no after effects 
nor ill side effects on any organ of the body. * * * nor does it leave any 
toxic residue in the system. * * * may be administered to children with 
safety"; (circular) "May be taken by adults and children for a long period 
of time without any ill effects. * * * nor does it leave any toxic residue 
in the system. * * * absolutely harmless for children." Misbranding was 
alleged for the further reason that the packages failed to bear on the label 
a statement of the quantity or proportion of alcohol contained in the article. 
Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that certain statements re- 
garding the curative and therapeutic effects of the article, appearing on the 
carton label and in the circular, falsely and fraudulently represented that it 
was effective as an overhaul tonic; effective as a treatment for pains across 
the back, rheumatism, neuralgia and strained muscles; effective as a treatment 
for chronic constipation, indigestion, distress after eating, hyperacidity, bad 
taste in the mouth, halitosis and kidney trouble; effective in stimulating the 
action of the kidneys and bladder, alkalinizing the contents of the kidneys 
and bladder, and soothing irritations of the bladder; and effective in ridding 
the body of impurities and waste matter through the kidneys and bowels and 
restoring the normal functioning of those orKans.
On May 25, 1934, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation 
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.