30990. Adulteration and misbranding of Elixir Ferro-Quin "With Strychnia and 
Calcigol With Iodine Tablets. Misbranding of Cholax Brand Pulvis 
, Effervescent Sodii Phosphatis Compound, V. E. T. Skin Remedy, Der- 
matans Tablets, Pancreatone Capsules, and Meth-O-Sol (liniment). 
V. S. v. George T. Lambert, David Periera, and George D. Lambert (The 
Crescent-Kelvan Co.). Pleas of nolo contendere. Fines, $250. (F. & 
D. No. 42657. Sample Nos. 9901-D, 29929-D, 29930-D, 30049-D, 30050-D, 
30051-D, 30248-D.)
This action involved shipments of Ferro-Quin With Strychnia that contained 
less tincture of ferric citrochloride than the amount declared; V. E. T. Skin 
Remedy the labeling of which bore false and fraudulent curative and thera- 
peutic claims and also failed to bear a declaration of the alcohol present; 
Dermatans that contained arsenic sulfide in excess of the amount declared on 
the label: Cholax Brand Pulvis Effervescens Sodii Phosphatis Compound the 
labeling of which bore false and fraudulent curative and therapeutic claims 
and false and misleading statements indicating that it was of pharmacopoeial 
standard and contained a significant amount of lithium; Pancreatone the 
labeling of which bore false and fraudulent curative and therapeutic claims 
and false and misleading representations regarding its constituents; Methyl- 
Sol the labeling of which bore false and fraudulent curative and therapeutic 
claims; and Calcigol With Iodine the labeling of which bore false and fraudu- 
lent curative and therapeutic claims and false and misleading representations 
regarding its content of iodine.
On April 14, 1939, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in 
the district court an information against George T. Lambert, David Periera, and 
George D. Lambert, trading as the Crescent-Kelvan Co., a business trust, 
Philadelphia, Pa., alleging shipment by said defendant in violation of the 
Food and Drugs Act as amended, within the period from on or about July 16, 
1937, to on or about July 16, 1938, from the State of Pennsylvania into the 
States of New Jersey and Delaware of quantities of the above-named drugs 
which were misbranded and portions of which were also adulterated.
Analysis showed that the V. E. T. Skin Remedy consisted of water, alcohol, 
a gum, and a very small amount of phenol, that the Cholax Brand Pulvis 
Effervescens Sodii Phosphatis Compound consisted essentially of sulfates and 
phosphates of sodium and magnesium and a trace of lithium, with citric acid 
and tartaric acid and sodium bicarbonate as an effervescent base; that the 
Pancreatone consisted essentially of compounds of arsenic, manganese, and 
strychnine, animal substance (possibly pancreas), and plant material including 
gentian; that the Meth-O-Sol contained camphor, methyl salicylate, and oleo- 
resin of capsicum with turpentine and croton oil indicated; and that the 
Calcigol contained a maximum of 0.0309 grain of iodine per tablet.
The Ferro-Quin With Strychnia was alleged to be adulterated in that its 
strength fell below the professed standard and quality under which it was 
sold since each ounce of the article was represented to contain 40 minims of 
tincture of ferric citrochloride, whereas each ounce of the article contained 
not more than 30.9 minims of ferric citrochloride. It was alleged to be mis- 
branded in that the statement "Each ounce represents * * * Tr. Ferric 
Citro Chloride 40 Min.," borne on the label, was false and misleading.
The V. E. T. Skin Remedy was alleged to be misbranded in that it contained 
alcohol but the label failed to bear a statement of the quantity or proportion 
of alcohol that it contained. It was alleged to be misbranded further in that 
certain statements, designs, and devices regarding its curative and therapeutic 
effects, borne on the bottle label, falsely and fraudulently represented that it 
was effective as a skin remedy and as a treatment for skin irritations, eczema, 
and itch.
The Dermatans was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement "Arsenic 
Sulph. * * * 1-60 gr.," borne on the bottle label, was false and misleading 
since it represented that each tablet contained 1/60 grain of arsenic sulfide; 
whereas the tablets contained more arsenic sulfide than the amount represented, 
namely, not less than 0.020 grain, i. e., 1/50 grain of arsenic sulfide.
The Pulvis Effervescens Sodii Phosphatis Compound was alleged to be mis- 
branded in that statements in the labeling regarding its therapeutic and curative 
effects falsely and fraudulently represented that it was effective as a treatment 
for rheumatism, gout, uric acid, jaundice, dizziness, biliousness, uric acid condi- 
tions, nausea from various causes, and affections of the stomach, liver, and 
kidneys; effective to stimulate the intestinal secretions necessary to a healthy 
digestion and to regulate the liver, kidneys, and bowels; effective as a stomach 
and liver salt and effective as an anti-lithic, anti-rheumatic, and alterative; 
effective as of therapeutic value wherever a uric acid solvent, hepatic, stimulant, 
toxaemic, eliminant, or gastric sedative is required; and effective to.improve 
the constitution. It was alleged to be misbranded further in that the statement 
"Pulvis Effervescens Sodii Phosphatis Comp." borne on the bottles and cartons, 
was false and misleading in that it represented that the article consisted 
of sodium phosphas effervescens, a product recognized in the U. S. Pharma- 
copoeia, whereas it did not consist of sodium phosphas effervescens since it 
contained not more than 16.4 percent of exsiccated sodium phosphate; whereas 
the pharmacopoeia requires that sodium phosphas effervescens contain not less 
than 20 percent of exsiccated sodium phosphate and said article contained mag- 
nesium sulfate and sodium sulfate, ingredients not present in sodii phosphas 
effervescens as described in the pharmacopoeia. It was alleged to be mis- 
branded further in that the statement "Containing * * * Lithia" borne 
on the bottle label was misleading since it created the impression that the 
article contained lithium in an amount sufficient to be of therapeutic importance, 
whereas it contained but a trace of lithium.
The Pancreatone was alleged to be misbranded in that statements on the bot- 
tle label regarding its curative and therapeutic effects falsely and fraudulently 
represented that it was effective as a treatment for diabetes mellitus and all 
diseases of pancreatic origin. It was alleged to be misbranded further in that 
the statement "Pancreatone" borne on the bottle label was false and misleading 
since it represented that the article consisted solely of material derived from 
pancreas; whereas it did not consist solely of material derived from pancreas, 
but did contain other ingredients, namely, compounds of arsenic, manganese, 
strychnine, and plant material including gentian.
The Meth-O-Sol Liniment was alleged to be misbranded in that statements on 
the label regarding its curative and therapeutic effects falsely and fraudulently 
represented that it was effective as a treatment for neuritis, rheumatism, pleu- 
risy, lumbago, backache, sciatica, and other conditions in which there is pain.
The Calcigol With Iodine was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength 
fell below the professed standard and quality under which it was sold in that 
each of the tablets was represented to contain %o grain of iodine; whereas the 
tablets contained not more than 0.031 grain, namely, %2 grain of iodine. It was 
alleged to be misbranded in that the statement "Iodine %o gr.," borne on the 
label, was false and misleading. It was alleged to be misbranded further in 
that statements on the bottle label regarding its curative and therapeutic effects 
falsely and fraudulently represented that it was effective as a treatment for 
croup, tonsillitis, and bronchitis.
The V. E. T. Skin Remedy was also alleged to be misbranded in violation of 
the Insecticide Act of 1910, as reported in notices of judgment published under 
that act.
On December 8, 1939, pleas of nolo contendere were entered by the defendants. 
On January 5, 1940, the court imposed a fine of $250 for violation of both acts, 
the fine to be apportioned equally among the three defendants.
GEOVEB B. HTT.T., Acting Secretary of Agriculture.