26988. Adulteration and misbranding of Surgical Gauze Bandage and Surgical 
Gauze. U. S. v. 160 Cartons of Surgical Gauze Bandage and 160 Pack- 
ages of Surgical Gauze. Default decree of condemnation and destruc- 
tion.    (F. & D. nos. 38779, 38780.    Sample nos. 17435-C, 17437-C, 17438-C.)
These products were represented on the label to be sterile, when they were 
not sterile, but were contaminated with viable aerobic and anaerobic bacteria.
On December 10, 1936, the United States attorney for the Southern District 
of New York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in 
the district court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 150 cartons of 
an article labeled "Surgical Gauze Bandage" and 150 packages of another 
article, labeled "Surgical Gauze", at New York, N. Y., alleging that the 
articles had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about October 26, 
1936, by Handy Pad Supply Co., from Worcester, Mass., and that they were 
adulterated and misbranded in violation of the Food and Drugs Act.
The Surgical Gauze Bandage was alleged to be adulterated in that its 
purity fell below the professed standard under which it was sold, namely, 
"Surgical Gauze Bandage * * * Sterilized * * * This bandage has 
been carefully manufactured * * * for surgical use", in that the article 
was not sterile, but was contaminated with viable aerobic and anaerobic bac- 
teria. Said article was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the statements, 
"Surgical Gauze Bandage * * * Sterilized" and "This bandage has been 
carefully manufactured * * * for surgical use", borne on the label, were 
false and misleading in that it was not sterile and was not suitable for surgical 
use because it was contaminated with viable micro-organisms, and (2) in that 
the statement, "Guarantee Truss Co. 641 Amsterdam Avenue 3-4 E. 116th 
to 449 E. 149th St.", borne on the package, was false and misleading in that 
the name and address stated were not the name and address of the manufac- 
turer of the article.
The Surgical Gauze was alleged to be adulterated in that its purity fell 
below the professed standard under which it was sold, namely, "Surgical 
Gauze * * * Sterilized", in that it was not sterile, but was contaminated 
with viable aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Said article was alleged to be 
misbranded In that the statement, "Guarantee Surgical Gauze   *   *   *   Steri-
lized", was false and misleading in that it was not sterile, but was contaminated 
with viable micro-organisms.
On December 23, 1936, no claimant having appeared, judgment of con- 
demnation was entered and it was ordered that the products be destroyed.
HARRY L. BROWN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.