5797. Misbranding of Cuban honey.    TJ. S. v. 38 Jars and 284 Packages of Honey.
Decrees of condemnation. P.option of product ordered destroyed and 
remainder ordered sold upon adoption of safeguards to insure its use 
in compliance with the law. (F. D. C. Nos. 8170, 8371. Sample Nos. 1116-F, 
1117-F, 5901-F.)
On August 21 and September 28, 1942, the United States attorneys for the 
Eastern District of Missouri and the Northern District of Illinois filed libels 
against 25 $l-size, 7 seize, and 6 $3.75-size jars of honey at St. Louis, Mo., 
and 141 9-ounce, 81 22%-ounce, 56 48-ounce, 3 96-ounce, and 3 1-gallon 
packages of honey at Chicago, Ill., alleging that the article had been shipped 
in interstate commerce on or about June 16, July 18, and August 29, 1942, from 
Lansing, Mich., by Cuban Honey, Inc.; and charging that it was misbranded. 
The article was labeled in part: "El Aguinaldo Cuban Honey."
Analysis of a sample of the article showed that it consisted of honey, and 
that the mineral matter therein amounted to approximately one-sixth of 1 
percent.
The lot at Chicago was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements appear- 
ing in its labeling which represented and suggested that it would constitute a 
remedy fOr sick and wounded soldiers,
" and that it provided a significant portion 
of minerals, and constituted an adequate treatment for digestive disorders, 
bronchial asthma, bronchitis, asthma, bronchial pneumonia, coughs, sinus con- 
ditions, hay fever, and stomach ulcers were false and misleading since it would 
not constitute a remedy for sick and wounded soldiers nor an adequate treat- 
ment for the conditions above-described, and it did not provide a significant 
portion of minerals.
The lot at St. Louis was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements ap- 
pearing in its labeling which represented and suggested that it constituted a 
remedy for sick and wounded soldiers; that it was valued for its medicinal 
properties; that it played an important part in the preservation of zestful health 
for those who were well and in restoring health to those who were ill; that it
- differed in a material respect from domestic honey; that when used in the 
place'of other sweets, it would cause children'to thrive; that it constituted a 
source of -vital energy and was a great help in the heavy daily battle pf life; / 
' that it would aid nature in-building and maintaining health;' that, when taken ^ 
as directed, it possessed laxative qualities; that it was a relaxing food; that 
it would aid in more normal actions the digestive system; that it would be 
retained by those" whose digestion was impaired and who have difficulty in 
retaining food; that it would soothe tired nerves and aid in preventing sleepless 
nights; that.it defied chemical analysis; that it provided the necessary mineral 
salts; that it contained a significant proportion of minerals; that it was more 
easily retained in the stomachs of children than were other foods suitable for 
them; that it was a substitute for cod liver oil and orange juice; that, when 
used as directed, it would cause an increase in weight in children not caused 
hy other common foods; that it would cause a decrease in restlessness and 
distress after feeding; and that it was efficacious in cases of rickets and malnu- 
trition were false and misleading since it did not differ in a material respect 
from domestic honey, it had not defied chemical analysis, it did not contain 
, a significant proportion of minerals, it was not a substitute for cod liver oil 
and orange juice, and it would not be efficacious for the purposes recommended^ 
or^accomplish the results claimed. Both lots were alleged to be. misbranded 
further in that the ¦following statements appearing in the labeling of the lot at
, St Louis,, "Analysis % ___^ Water 18.53, Invert Sugars 71.01, Sucrose .83,
Anti .25, Dextrine 2:39, Undetermined 6.99, Alkaloids None,'' and "Analysis of 
Ash Ji.—^o __i_ Silicon 4.78, Iron .88,, Calcium 3.67, Magnesium 1.18, Sodium 
14:12, Potassium 48.47, Phosphorous .78, Sulphur .97, Chlorine 9.87, Undetermined 
.15227,? and substantially the* same statements in the labeling of the lot at 
^Chicago, were misleading; since such statements failed to reveal that the article, 
consisted essentially of -a variety of sugars, and that the other constituents 
named, including ther various mineral elements mentioned, were present in the 
article in so.small a proportion as to be negligible.
:   The. article was also alleged to be misbranded underthe provisions of the 
law applicable to drugs as reported in the notices of judgment on drugs and 
ide vices. ¦" 
*     On December 7,1942, and January 6,1943, no claimant appeared, judgments of 
condemnation were entered and it was ordered that the lot at Chicago be de- 
stroyed and that the lot at St. Louis be sold to the person or corporation offering- 
! the highest bid and adopting such safeguards as might be recommended by the 
Federal Security Agency against its use in violation.of the law.