23019. Adulteration and misbranding of Cheno Restorer Tablets. XT. S. v. 
30 Dozen Packages and SO Dozen Packages of Cheno Restorex 
Tablets. Decree of condemnation and forfeiture. Product re- 
leased under bond to be relabeled. (F. & D. nos. 33Ill, 33171. Sample 
nos. 389-B, 5782-B.)
These cases involved a product, the labeling of which bore unwarranted cura- 
tive and therapeutic claims. The product was represented to contain in four 
tablets, a level teaspoonful of dehydrated vegetables, whereas it did not. One 
lot was labeled, " does not contain drugs", when as a matter of fact the 
product did contain drugs.
On July 24, and August 8, 1934, the United States attorney for the Eastern 
District of Pennsylvania, acting upon reports by the Secretary of Agriculture, 
filed in the district court libels praying seizure and condemnation of 110 dozen 
packages of Cheno Restorer Tablets at Philadelphia, Pa., alleging that the 
article had been shipped in interstate commerce, in part on or about July 14, 
1934, by the Railway Terminal Warehouse Co. (invoiced by Alberty Labora- 
tories) from Chicago, Ill., and in part on or about July 13, 1934, by U. S. Okey 
(a fictitious name used by Alberty Food Laboratories), from Los Angeles, Calif., 
and charging Misbranding of a portion and adulteration and misbranding of 
the remainder in violation of the Food and Drugs Act as amended.
Analysis showed that the article consisted of powdered plant material in- 
cluding a laxative drug, together with calcium and phosphorus compounds, 
compressed in tablet form.
Adulteration of one of the lots was alleged in that its strength fell below 
the professed standard under which it was sold, namely, (page 13 of booklet 
entitled " Cheno Keep or Regain That Youthful Figure ", a supply of which 
was shipped by the manufacturer to the consignee on March 10, 1934) " Four 
Cheno Restorer Tablets Contain a Level Teaspoonful of dehydrated vegetables."
Misbranding of one of the lots was alleged for the reason that a certain 
statement on the label was false and misleading, since it represented that the 
article did not contain drugs, whereas it did contain drugs. Misbranding of 
both lots was alleged for the reason that the term " Restorex ", appearing on 
the label, was false and fraudulent, since the article was not a restorative in 
any sense, and in particular was not a restorative of the normal size and shape 
of the human body as the manufacturer interpreted the term in collateral 
advertising.
On August 17, 1934, Thomas Martindale & Co., Philadelphia, Pa., having 
appeared as claimant, judgments of condemnation and forfeiture were entered, 
and it was ordered by the court that the product be released to the claimant 
upon payment of costs and the execution of bonds totaling $1,000, conditioned 
that it be relabeled under the supervision of this Department.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.