Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungicide, and rodenticide act

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungicide, and rodenticide act
Physical Description:
v. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Agricultural Research Service
United States -- Plant Pest Control Branch
United States -- Plant Pest Control Division
United States -- Agricultural Research Service. -- Pesticides Regulation Division
Publisher:
The Service
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:
Frequency:
irregular
completely irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Pesticides -- Law and legislation -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre:
serial   ( sobekcm )
law report or digest   ( marcgt )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )

Notes

Dates or Sequential Designation:
Nos. 170-200 (issued Apr. 1954)-
Dates or Sequential Designation:
Ceased with June 1970 issue: Nos. 869-919.
Issuing Body:
Issued 1954-1957 by the service's Plant Pest Control Branch; 1958-Feb. 1962 by the service's Plant Pest Control Division; Sept. 1962-<Sept. 1965> by the service's Pesticides Regulation Division.
General Note:
Title from caption.
Statement of Responsibility:
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, ...

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 004700307
oclc - 01780408
lccn - sn 98047303
System ID:
AA00008500:00002

Related Items

Preceded by:
Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungidide, and rodenticide act
Succeeded by:
Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungicide and rodenticide act

Full Text
rI
It
it i
Mv; 5 .,.!


44


issued February 1955


2W~L~O
'5


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF


AGRICULTURE


AGRICULTURAL


RESEARCH


SERVICE


PLANT PEST CONTROL BRANCH


NOTICES


JUDGMENT
FUNGICIDE,


UNDER


AND


THE


FEDERAL


INSECTICIDE,


RODENTICIDE ACT


Nos. 201-230


The following notices of judgment relate to cases arising in the United States
District Courts and are approved for publication as provided in section 6 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U. S. C. 135d).


M. R. CLARKSON,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Research ,Serice.


WASHINGTON, D. C., December 15, 1954.


61. Lack


registration,


misbranding,


B. H. C. DUST CONCENTR
more or less, of "BARCO 12%
decree of condemnation. (I.
The product, "BARCO 12% B. H.
tered under the Federal Insecticid
examination, the product was found


ATE."


F
F


!. H. C.
. & R.
. DUS'
Fung
contain


nd adulteration of "BARCO 12%
U. S. v. ninety-one 50-pound bags,
DUST CONCENTRATE." Default
No. 186. I. D. No. 20599.)
T CONCENTRATE," was not regis-
icide, and Rodenticide Act. Upon
.n 6.38% of gamma isomer of benzene


hexachloride and 43.30% of other isomers of benzene hexachloride instead of
12% gamma isomer of benzene hexachloride and 74% of other isomers of benzene
hexachloride, as claimed on the label.
On May 13, 1952, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of
Texas, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of ninety-one
50-pound bags, more or less, of "BARCO 12% B. H. C. DUST CONCENTRATE,"
at Sweetwater, Tex., alleging that on or about August 28, 1951, the product was
transported interstate by Barco Chemicals, Inc., from Des Moines, Iowa, in
violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was an economic poison and was not registered
with the Secretary of Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that the labeling stated in part,
"Gamma Isomer of Benzene Hexachloride ----------- 12%
Other Isomers----- -------- -------- 74%
Inert ----------------- --------------- 14%"
whereas the product contained less than 12% gamma isomer of benzene hexa-


3 I, RPR


30






142

202.


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


Lack of registration of "MORTRON
"MORTANE." U. S. v. 707 cartons,
IZER With MORTANE" and 2,568
"MORTANE." Default decree of i


RODENTICIDE


ACT


EI.rI.LN J.


VAPORIZER With MORTANE" and
more or less, of "MORTRON VAPOR-
-ounce packages, more or less, of
:ondemnation, forfeiture and destruec


tion. (I. F. & R. No. 189. I. D. Nos. 24846 and 24847.)
The products, "MORTRON VAPORIZER With MORTANE" and "MORTANE,"
were not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act
The United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, acting upon


a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United Stat
a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of '
or less, of "MORTRON VAPORIZER With MORTANE" at
packages, more or less, of "MORTANE," at Miami, Fla., alleging
Were economic poisons which had been transported interstate
30, 1952, and May 1, 1952, by the Exterminator Corporation
Philadelphia, Pa., in violation of the act,
It was alleged that the products were not registered with
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.


District Court,
cartons, more
2,568 34-ounce
at the products
or about April
America from


the Secrej


ry or


On December 23,
and fofeiture was
he products. On
ordered that the el
tions fpr their use
di dA contain an


1953, no claimant having appeared,
entered and the United States Marsh
May 6, 1954, an amended judgment
leciric cords and plugs be given to (
as the electric cords and plugs wer'
economic poison. The United State


a decree of condemnation
Lal was ordered to destroy
Swas entered and it was
certain charitable institu-
e in nowise a dangenor
is Marshal was ordered to


destroy the said 707 cartons of "MORTRON VAPORIZER With MORTANE" and
2,568 %-ounce packages of "MORTANE."
203. Lack of registration and lack of required information on labels of "UNI-
VERSAL UNI-CIDE". U. S. v. one 50-gallon drum, more or less, of
"UNIVERSAL UNI-CIDE". Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture
and destruction, F. & R. No. 233. I No. 27885.)


The product
Insecticide, F1
label affixed to
or measure of
"On July 17,


, UNIVERSALL UNT-CIDE" wa
fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
the container of the product did
the content.
1953, the United States Attorney


s not registered under fb'herfl'
An examination showed that the
not bear a statement of net weight

r for the Eastern District of South


Carolina, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in th
States District Court, a libel praying seizure for condemnation and con
of one 50-gallon drum, more or less, of "UNIVERSAL UNI-CIDE" at C
S; C, alleging that the product was an economic poison which had bed
ported interstate on or about April 1, 1953, by Universal Laborator
Xampa, Fla,, in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secr
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the label affixed to the container of the product did
ply with the act in that it failed to bear a statement of the net weight or
Of the content of the container.
On September 1, 1953, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condi
and forfeiture was entered and the United States Marshal was ordered t
the product.


'e United
ifiscation
olumbia,
en trans-
ies from


:etary


not corn-
measure


emnation
o destroy


204. Lack of registration of "METHO-NOX INSECTICIDE REFILL FOR
COLUMBIA AUTOMATIC INSECTICIDER VAPORIZER" and "COL-
DANE Chemical Refill for Fly Control Unit." U. S. v. Seventy 1-ounce
naa..4a.<= mn*a. ta a. r(. att RAT1Ur NMlV IMcQPfTTC'TIftl DEr!I T!. flRn


^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ "^^^^ ~^^^^^^^^^^"~^^m"^~^"~^^~^m^^~


w







201-230]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


143


apa, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
States District Court, a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation
of seventy 1-ounce containers, more or less, of "METHO-NOX INSECTICIDE
REFILL FOR COLUMBIA AUTOMATIC INSECTICIDER VAPORIZER" and
one hundred and sixty-six 1-ounce containers, more or less, of "COLDANE
Chemical Refill for Fly Control Unit" at Evansville, Ind., alleging that the prod-
ucts were economic poisons which had been transported interstate on or about
April 15, 1953, by Columbia Chemical Company, Inc., from Chicago, Ill., in
violation of the act.


- It was alleged tha
culture as required 1
Columbia Chemic
product, "COI.DANI
demnation was ent
condemnation was
"METHO-NOX IN


t the products were
by Section 4 of the a
al Company, Inc.,
E Chemical Refill fo
ered releasing the


not regis
ict.


Chi
r F
pro


entered providing for
SECTICIDE REFILL


INSECTICIDER VAPORIZER."


tered with the Secretary of Agri-


cago, Ill., claimed ownership of the
ly Control Unit" and a decree of con-
duct to the claimant. A decree of


the
FOR


destruction of
COLUMBIA


the product,
AUTOMATIC


Lack of registration of
"PURE LINDANE IN
'"FLY GONE" FLY A
trainers, more or less,
decree of condemnatio
I. D. No. 26452.)
ie products '"FLY GOT
DANE INSECTICIDE",


'"FLY GONE" FLY AND INSECT KILLER' and
'SECTICIDE". U. S. v. 27 units, more or less, of
ND INSECT KILLER' and nineteen l!'-ounce con-
of "PURE LINDANE INSECTICIDE". Default
n, forfeiture and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 232.


NE" FLY AND INSECT KILLER' and "PURE
were not registered under the Federal Insec.ticide,


Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.


On or about
trict of Indian
the United Sta
confiscation of
KILLER' and
INSECTICIDE
sons which ha
Home Mfg. &


June 30, 1953,
a, acting upon
tes District Co
27 units, mor
nineteen 1 -ou
3", at Spencer,
d been transpo


iales Compal


It was alleged that the
Agriculture, as required by
On September 14, 1953, n
and forfeiture was entered
the products.


Lack of registration and
MENTAL PURPOSES O
of "15% ALDRIN FOR E
decree of condemnation
I. D. No. 25242.)


the United States Attorney for


a rel
urt,
e or
nce c
Ind.,
rted


port by t
a libel p:
less, of
ontainer
alleging
interstate


th(
ra;
* *
s,
th
e


Secretary of A
ring seizure for
'FLY GONE" F
more or less, of
at the products
on or about Ma


the Southern Dis-
Lgriculture, filed in
condemnation and
'LY AND INSECT
"PURE LINDANE
were economic poi-
y 21, 1953, by The


ny, from Piqua, Ohio, in violation of the act.
products were not registered with the Secretary of
Section 4 of the act.
o claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and the United States Marshall was ordered to destroy


misbranding of "15% ALDRIN FOR EXPERI-
NLY." U. S. v. 250 50-pound bags, more or less,
EXPERIMENTALL PURPOSES ONLY." Consent
and release under bond. (I. F. & R. No. 194.


The product, "15% ALDRIN FOR EXPERIMENTAL PURPOSES ONLY,"
was not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodetnticide
Act, and the labels affixed to the containers of the product did not bear an


ingredient statement as
On June 12, 1952, t.
Texas, acting upon a r
States District Court i
of 250 50-pound bags,
TITTlr 'ftn'nnll /n lrr'WT'T r 1


is req
he Un
report
i libel
more
d.. tm P-.


uired by
ited Sta
by the S
praying
or less,
mn --


the act.
tes Atto
secretary
seizure
of "15%
a I1 -5- -


rney for the Southern District of
of Agriculture, filed in the United
for condemnation and confi actionn
ALDRIN FOR EXPERIMENTAL
* t- A. .L t a.- .


Th
INI






144


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. F.R. N.J.


product into ni ewith thes1and ato n
tion decree. On September 4, 1952, a decree of condemnation was entered and it
was ordered that the product be released to the claimant under bond.


Lack of registration
adulteration of "N
100-pound bags, m
4-9-3." Decree of
I. D. No. 27999.)


and required information on label, misbranding, and
ACO LUCKY SEED BED No. 30 4-9-3." U. S. v. 105
ore or less, of "NACO LUCKY SEED BED No. 30
condemnation and forfeiture. (I. F. & R. No. 248.


The product, "NACO LUCKY SEED BED No. 30 4-9-3," was not registered
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination
of the product showed that the labels affixed to the containers of the product
did not bear an ingredient statement or an adequate warning or caution state-
ment. The product was also otherwise misbranded and adulterated.
On Janry 285, 1954, the United States Attorney for the Southern District
of Georgia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, fTed ii R
United States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and con*
fiscation of 105 100-pound bags, more or less, of "NACO LUCKY SEED BED
No. 30 4-9-," at Jesup, Ga., alleging that the product was an economic poison
which had been transported interstate on or about Decemnber 12, 1953 ly Naco
Fertilizer Company from Jacksonville, Fla., in violation of the act.
It was aege thathe product was not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture, as required by Section 4 of the tet.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act, in that its abeli sta in t, "* 5 LBS. 40% CHLORDANE PER
TON *," which implied or represented that the product contained 5 pounds
of 40% chlordane per ton, whereas the product contained less than 5 pounds of


40% e~chtaeB per ton.
Tt Iwas alleged that trhe products was


furt


her misbranded within the meaning


S- i a k ji^- ,---- .- k w w ^*= w _a L -- K^ m w K mf k ww I Jk v _""
of the act, in that its lab s did not bear an ingredient statement giving the
name and percentage of each of the active ingredients, together with the total ..
percentage of the inert ingredients, or an ingredient statement giving the names
of each of the acted and each of the inert ingredients in the descending order
of the percentage of each present in each classification, together with the total
percentage of the inert ingredients.
It was alleged that the product was further misbranded within the meaning
of the act, in that its accompanying labelig did not contain directions for use,
which are necesary and, complied with, adequate for the protection of the

It was alleged that the product was further misbranded in that the label did I
not bear a warning or caution statement, which is necessary and, if complied
with, adequate to prevent injury to living man and other vertebrate animals. |
It was alleged that the product was adulterated within the meaning of the i
act, in that its strength qi purity fell below the professed standard or quality, '
as expressed on its label, since the label bore the statement "* 5 LBS. 40%
OHLORDANE PER TON *, which implied or represented that the product
contained 5 pounds of 40% chlordane per ton, whereas the product contained
less than pounds of 40% chlordane per ton. j
On April 1, 1954, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation was
entered and it was ordered that the product be delivered to Boys Estate, Boys
Estate, Ga., charitable institution, for use on its farm as a fertilizer for cotton -
or corn crops only. |
904< Aah,3*anfTin nad mbachronn1w nC P'n fl ADa DTAU S *n_ .h


rn I J ul anu Lllg vr re Tr u vnr rrUPn~rr


&&fLu


*VUI +IrYWFIYI CUYLVIC a








201-230]


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


145
*^J J1^
"Pi ,a^


poison which had been transported interstate on or about November % 19,53
by C. M. Kimball Co., from Winthrop, Mass., in violation of the Federal Insecti-
cide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
It was alleged that the product was adulterated within the meaning of the
act in that the statements-


"RED CAP


ACTIVE


CONTENTS ONE QUART
BLEACH
A SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION
INGREDIENT, SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 5.25%
INERT INGREDIENTS 94.75% BY WT.


BY Wt


* ** *"


implied that the product conta
and not more than 94.75%, by \
contained less than 5.25%, by
94.75%, by weight, of inert ingre
It was alleged that the prod
act in that its labeling bore the

"i E-


ACTIVE


A
INGREDI


ined 5.25%, by we
eight, of inert ingi
weight, of sodium
dients.
uct was inisbrande
statements
"RED CAP


eight, of sodium hypochlorite
redients, whereas the product
hypochlorite and more than

d within the meaning of the


*) *


----N '-a 1 -~ --- i -- n


UUOJNTEIJJNS OUNBE 1 LUAItT
BLEACH
SODIUM HYPOGHLORITE SOLUTION
ENT, SODIUM HYPOCHISORITE 5.25%
INGREDIENTS 94.75% BY WT.
*


BY WT.,


INERT


which implied or represented that the product contained 5.25%, by weight, of
sodium hypochlorite and not more than 94.75%, by weight, of inert ingredients,
whereas the product contained less than 5.25%, by weight, of Sodium hypo-
chlorite and more than 94.75%, by weight, of inert ingredients.
On April 22, 1954, a decree of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and
" t'was" ordered that the product be delivered to St. Joseph's Hospital, Bangor,
Maine.
W. Lack of registration and required information and misbranding of "WEED
KILLER W. P. SOIL STERILANT." U. & two 200-pound containers
and one 100-pound container, more or less, of "WEED KILLER W. P.
SOIL STERILANT." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and
destruction. (I. F. &R. No.247. I. D No.27733.)


The product, "WEED KILMET W. P. SOIL STEaILANr," was not
under the Federal Insecticide, Ftungloide, and Rodenticide Act,
An examination of the product showed that the labels affixed to the r
of the product did not bear an adequate warning or caution statement,
directions for use, an ingredient statement, or a statement of the net
measure of the content.
On January 26, 1954, the United States Attorney for the Wester
of Washington, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agricultufe, fi
United States District Court. a libel nraving seiZure for condemn


Jft~sqs te


less, of "
nlf nl i on t


of two 200-pound


r1.l I IL3


KILLER 1V
nrrliir.F fl'fl.


registered

containers
adequate
weight or

a District
led in the
ition and


[containers and one 100-pound container, more or
7. P. SOIL STERILANT," at Vancouver, Wash,,


I** i' i ,







146


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. F. B. N.J.


ingredients, or an ingredient statement giving the names of each of the active
and each of the inert ingredients in the descending order of the percentage of
each present in each classification, together with the total percentage of the


tiert ingredients.
It Was further
accompanying the
sary and, it coml


alleged that the product was misbranded in that the labeling
h product did not contain directions for use which are necem-
plied with, adequate for the protection of the public.


It was further alleged
did not bear a warning
plied with, adequate to
animals.
On March 1, 1954, no
demnation and forfeiture
destroyed.


that the product was misbranded in that the label
or caution statement which is necessary and, if corn-
prevent injury to living man and other vertebrate


claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
was entered and it was ordered that the product be


Lack of registration and required information on label and misbranding
of "BUGTDEATH UNITS." U. S. v. 11 "BUG DEATH UNITS," more or
less, each consisting of 1 "BUG DEATH VAPORTZER" and one tgram
container of "LINDANE PELLETS." Default decree of condemnation
forfeiture, and destru n. (L F. & R.& Noa 245. I. 0.: e H


ii


The product,


"BUG DEATH UNITS,"


consisting of


IZER" and one 31-gram rntainer of 'LINDA
tered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
nation of the product showed that the outside
of the product did not bear an ingredient state
or measure of the content or a statement givil


LNE P
and R
conta
meant,
ag the


1 "BUG DEATH VAPOR-
'ELLETS" was not regis-
odenticide Act. An exam-
iner of the retail package
a statement of net weight
name and address of the


manufacturer, registrant, or person for whom manufactured.
On January 21, 1954, the United Stats Attorney for the Northern
of Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, file
United States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation
fiscation of 11 "BUG DEATH UNITS," each consisting of one "BUG
VAPORIZER" and one 31-gram container of "LINDANE PELLETS"


cago, Ill., alleging that the product was an econc
transported interstate on or about August 29, 195
Los Angeles, Calif., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not regisi
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the product failed to comply
in that the retail cartons containing i "BUG DE
31-gram container of "LINDANE PELLETS" did
tainers or wrappers of the retail package a ftateme
ure of the content, or a statement giving the name


turer, registrant, or personzor whom manufact
It was alleged that the product was misi
containing 1 "BUG DEATH VAPORIZER"
"LINDANE PELLETS"' did not bear on the ou
eeenomic poison an ingredient statement giving
of the active ingredients, together with the
gredients, or an ingredient statement giving t
each of the inert ingredients in the descendir


present in each classic
ingredients.
On May 10, 1954, no
forfeiture was entered


ication,


together


)mic poison whicl
3, by Bug Death,


tered


vith
ATH


;ured.
raniled
* a


tsi
g t
tc


with the


I n one
de contain
he name
ital perct
names o
order of


with


1
II


District
d in the
and con-
DEATH
at Chi-
iad bgen
ic., rom


Secretary


the provisions of the act
V[ APORIZER" and one
bear on the outside con-
f the net weight or meas-
address of the manufac-


that the retail carons
31-gram container of
iners or wrappers of the
aed percentaga o each
entage of the inert in-
f each of the active and
the percentage of each


total percentage


claimant having appeared, a decree of condem
and the United States Marshal was ordered


nation and
to destroy


;iiii

.1
11


ul






201-230]


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


147


about July 30, 1951, by Cowley Manufactuing Company from Hugo Okla, in
violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was nqt registered with the Secretary of Agrif
culture as required by section 4 of the act.
On January 12, 1954, an order of condemnation and forfeiture was entered
and the United Statea Marshal was ordered to destroy the product.


212. Misbranding and adulteration of "WASH-WHITE HOUSEHOLD BLEACH?
P S. v. 764 one-quart containers, 268 one-half gallon containers and 88
uet-gallon containers, more or less, of "WASH-WHITE HOUSEHOLD
BLEACH." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
(I. F. & R. No. 246. I. D No. 28872.)
An examination of a sample of the product "WASH-WHITE HOUSEHOLD
ILEACIH" showed that it contained 4.44% of sodium hypochlorite instead of
5% of sodium hypochlorite as stated on the label. The claims made on the
o t the product were otherwise false and misleading.
"On 0nuary 13, 1954, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of
knas, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
iated States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and con-
fiscation of 764 one-quart containers, 268 one-half gallon containers and 88 one-
n containers, more or less, of "WASH-WHITE HOUSEHOLD BLEACH"
ct Paragould, Ark., alleging that the product was an economic poison which had
n transported interstate on or about February 2, 1953, by the Sapo Elixir
Chemical Company from St. Louis, Mo., in violation of the Federal Insecticide,
Exangeide, and Rodenticide Act,
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the act
oi that the labeling bore the statements:


:"


::
















::


CHLORITE 5.25%-
-BY WT.
h-White Bleach full
1 let stand; it will not

disinfectant for gen-
help in the kitchen or
porcelain, wood, glass


which implied or represented that the product contained 5.25% by weight of
sodium hypochlorite and not more than 94.75% by weight of inert ingredients,
and that the product, when used as directed, could be relied upon to disinfect
the articles and surfaces named in the labeling, and those implied by the term
"for general household use", whereas the product contained less than 5.25% by
weight of sodium hypochlorite, more than 94.75% by weight of inert ingredients,
and when used as directed, the product could not be relied upon to disinfect the
articles or surfaces named in the labeling or those implied by the term "for


general household u
It was alleged tha
in that its strength
which it was sold si
RITE 5.25% *
trained 5.25% by we
less than 5.25% by w
On May 28, 1954,


se."
It the product was adulterated within the meaning of the act


or purit
nce the
BY WT
ight of
eight of
no clair


:y fell below tl
labeling bore
" which implii
sodium bypocl
sodium hypocl
nant having a


professed standard
statementt "SODIL
represented that
te, whereas the p
te.
red a decree of ci


of quality under
;M HYPOCHLO-
the product con-
roduct contained


)ndemnation and


ifnrfoitinre wns pntPrPal' snrl thep Tnited Stntes MarIshal was ordered to destroy the


i "IX"IFY
: """ ,",


:


"ACTIVE INGREDIENT SODIUM HYPO'
INERT INGREDIENTS 94.75%-
Disinfecting and Deodorizing. Pour Was
strength into plumbing and drain openings anm
harm plumbing fixtures.
* Wash-White is an ideal deodorant and
eral household use. It is a particularly great
bathroom for cleaning and freshening enamel,
and linoleum surfaces."







148


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. F'. R. N.J.


fisoation of 132
% EMULSIF
product was an
about August 19
tion of the act.
It was alleged
in that its labeli

"BARCO


five-gallon containers, more or less, of "BARCO TOXAPHENE
IABLE CONCENTRATE" at Hobart, Okla., alleging that the
economic poison which had been transported interstate on or
, 195, by Barco Chemicals Inc., from Des Moines, Iowa, in viola-

I that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the act
.ng bore the statements :


)XAPHENE


EMULSIFIABLEI


CONCENTRATE
*K K K K KK K^K K KK KKK KKKKKK


Contains 6 Ibs. Ton4eVa per gallon


ACTIVE INGREDIENTS


TOX APiHENE
(Technical Chlorinaed Camphe, hlorne tent
67 .to .. .-. -- -- - 9_- --- -
RE2INED PE.. IL__.tLtbX Im----- ---
IERT ING DIENT1,-,, ---, -----a--a---- -.-.-.--.-


STAL_ l_ miimi ---- -a--.. --- -- -------IW --M,-ail- -.M --. u mOL


DIRECTIONS


NOT SPRAY


CONCENTRAT--M I X


WITH


WATER AS DIRECTED


Where No Qiuantty of Water is Given


e Sufficient


Amount For Good Coverage of One Acre.


GRASSHOPPERS


BAITS-Dry bait containing 1% pints Toxaphene per 100 lbs. of
coarse bran when applied at a rate of 5 to 10 lbs. per acre (accord-
ing to the severity of infestation) will give as good initial control
and will remain effective longer than a standard wet bait con-
taining 6 lbs. of sodium fluosiiate applied at the recommended
rate. A effective wet ba it c be prepared by mixing 1 lb. Toxa-
mpeae in emulsion form with 25 lbs. of mi-run bran and 3 times
the volume of sawdust (approximately 3 bushels). Enough
water is used to make a damp, crumbly mass. Wet bait should
be applied at a rate of 20 Ibs. per acre.

LIVESTOCK PESTS


WINTER TICK ON CAT)
AND SHEEP-Use 1 gallon
use as a spray or dip.


LE (except dairy animals), HORSES
Toxaphene in 119 gallons water and


- fl c A-


gbgo xi xi

30%
10%


I 1


TC


~ e: ""9Eq


1::


ooc~







201-230]


NOTICES fO


JUDGMENT


149


SUGAR BEET WEBWO-Use 1 quart per acre to control sugar
beet webworm larvae. Apply in such a manner as to give good
coverage to the underside of the beet leaves.


LYGUS BUGS ON ALFALFA, ALFALFA WEEVIL, CHINCH
BUGS-Use 2% pints per acre.
YELLOW STRIPED ABMY WORMS, SPITTLE BUGS ON AL-
FALFA-Use 1 quart per acre."


which implied or represented: (1) that the product contained 60% of Toxa-
phene (Technical Clllorinated Camphene, Chlorine Content 67% to 69%), six
pounds of Toxaphene per gallon, and not more than 10% of inert ingredients;
(2) that the product, when used as directed as a bran bait, would control grass-
hoppers; and (3) that the product, when used as directed, would control (a)
winter ticks on cattle (except dairy cattle), horses, and sheep, (b) the cotton
insects named at the rate of 1 quart of the product per acre, and (c) sugar beet


webworms, lygus
army worms, and
less than 60% of
tent 67% to 69%),
10% of inert ingr
bait, would not cc
rected, would not
product per acre,
weevils, chinch bi
It was alleged t
act in that its str
as expressed on its
"Contains 6
phene (Tec
to 69%) *
which statements
of Toxaphene per
Chlorine Content
whereas, the prod
less than 60% of
tent 67% to 69%),
On May 5, 1954-,


bugs
spitt
Toxa
less
edien


on alfalfa, alfalfa weevils,
le bugs on alfalfa; whereas
phene (Technical Chlorinat
than six pounds of Toxaphel


Its


)ntrol grt
control tl
or (c) s
igs, yello
hat the


ength
label
lbs. T
hnical
* 60%
implie
gallon
67% t
uct co


the product,


when


chinch bugs, yellow striped
,, (1) the product contained
ed Camphene, Chlorine Con-
ae per gallon, and more than
used as directed as a bran


isshoppers; and (3) the product, w
ie cotton insects named at the rate 4
sugar beet webworms, lygus bugs or
w striped army worms, or spittle
product was adulterated within the


ihen used
of 1 quart
I alfalfa,
bugs on r
meaning


as di-
of the
alfalfa
alfalfa.
of the


or purity fell below the professed standard of quality
since its labeling bore the statements:
oxaphene per gallon", "Active Ingredients: Toxa-
Chlorinated Camphene, Chlorine Content 67%
", "Inert Ingredients ** 10%"
d or represented that the product contained six pounds
, 60% of Toxaphene (Technical Chlorinated Camphene,
,o 69%), and not more than 10% of inert ingredients;
ntained less than six pounds of Toxaphene per gallon,


Toxaphene (Technical Chlorinated Camphene, Chlorine Con-
and more than 10% of inert ingredients.
no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and


forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the United States Marshal
destroy the product.
214. Misbranding and adulteration and lack of required information of "BARCO
DIELDRIN 15% EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE" and misbranding
and adulteration of "BARCO ALDRIN EQUIVALENT 2 23% EMULSI-
FIABLE CONCENTRATEt. U. S. v. 43 one-gallon cans, more or less,
of "BARCO DIELDRIN 15% EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE," and 3
one-gallon jugs, more or less, of "BARCO ALDRIN EQUIVALENT 2
23% EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE." Consent decree of condemna-
tion and release under bond. (I. F. & R. No. 235. I. D. Nos. 26520,
26521, and 20522.)







150


~BifCTCIDI),


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


l. F. R. N.J.


of 43 one-gallon cans, more or less, of "BARCO DIELDRIN 15% EMULSIFI-
ABLE CONCNTB&ATE," and 3 one-gallon jugs, more or less, of "BARCO AL-
DRIN EQUIVALENT 2 23% EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE" at Elk-
hart, Ind., alleging that the product "BARCO DIILDRIN 15% EMULSIFIABLE
CONCENTRATE" had been transported interstate on or about April 11, 1953
and June 10, 1953, and the product BARCO ALDRIN EQUIVALENT 2 23%
EMULSIFIABIE CONECNTRATE" had been transported interstate on or about
April 11, 1953, by Barco hemicals Inc., from Des Moines, Iowa, to South Bend,
Ind., and subsequently to Eikhart, Ind in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the "BARCO DIELDRIN 15% EMUILIFIAMBE CON-
CENCTRATE" was misbranded within the meaning of the act in that the label
stated:


"BARCO
DIE LDR.L
15% EMULSIFIABLt


CONBNTRATR


Contains 1.5 lbs. Dieldin per gallon


ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:
Hexachloro-Epoxy Octahydro B
Diuethano Naphthalene,- -- -.-- .. _-- -- --- .
elated Compounds .... --- ..- ... --.. .---- ---- --. i-- -
Petroleum Hydrocarbon ------ ---.------. --- ----.
INR INGREDIENTS---------_ -.--..----


Wight
15; 83%
2: 79%9o
Ts'88.%
8.00


TOTAL ..........- --..


100.00%


"GENERAL DIRECTIONS


This product is an emulsifiable insecticide containing 1.5 pounds
of Dieldrin per gallon. It is formulated to enable theusser to easily
prepare water dilutions of varying strengths. It may be used in
conventional hydraulic sprayers, low-volume ground applicators,
and airplane sprayers.

-COTTON INSECT CONTROL
Where the recommendations are expressed inm trns of actual
Dieldrin per acre, use the following table to determine the amount
of 15% Dieldrin required.


Recommended Doas a ge
Pounds Actal Dieldrin
Acre


Early season insect i
Iieldria. ------
Mid-season insect con-
trol, Dieldrainsc c
Late season inset con-


In
per

Ltrol,


.0W lb


AmountL


of


gallon int


..19 lb.


.15%
uired

sufficient


cover 30 acres
gaon in sufficient
cover 15 acres.
gallon in sufficient


Dieldrin


water

water

water


.







201-230]


NOEFtLCFIS


JVDQ&ENT


151


15 acres). For mid-season and late season control, use Dieldrin
at .15 to .4 pounds per acre (1 gallon in sufficient water to cover
3.75 to 10 acres in compliance with State recommendations).
--Fon early season control of certain species of cutworms, use 1
gallon in sufficient water to cover 15 acres.
+T6 control stink bugs in Arizona (Say's plant bug and brown cot-
ton bug) on cotton, it appears necessary to use % gallon per acre.
For control of the boll worm, add 1 quart of 25% DDT (contains
2 pounds DDT per gal.) to the recommended dosages for each acre
covered.


ADULT ALFALFA


WEEVIL CONTROL


For control of adult alfalfa weevil, use % gallon per acre (1
gallon will treat 6 acres). For application by ground sprayers:
Use enough water per acre to give uniform coverage. For appli-
cation by aircraft: use a minimum of 2 gallons of diesel oil (or
equivalent) per acre.
Apply in the early spring, when alfalfa is no more than 1 to 2 inches

S;Do not repeat the application.
Do not allow livestock to graze in treated fields prior to removal
o the first cutting of hay."
which statements implied or represented that the product contained 15% Diel-
drin, 1.5 pounds Dieldrin per gallon, and a total of 15.83% by weight of hexachloro
epoxy octahydro dimethano napthalene and 2.79% by weight of related com-
pounds, and that the product Iwhen based as directed in such statements would
be effective for the control of the insects named in such statements, whereas
the pro~trt contained less than 15% Dieldrin, less than 1.5 pounds Dieldrin
per gallon, and less than a total of 15.83% by weight of hexachloro epoxy oc-
tahydro dimethano napthalene, and 2.79% by weight of related compounds,
and when used as directed in such statements would not be effective for the
control of such insects.
It was alleged that the product "BARCO DIELDURIN 15% EMULSIFIABLE
CONCENTRATE" was in violation of the act in that the label borne by the
product did not bear a statement of net weight or measure of content.
It was alleged that the product "BARCO DIELDRIN 15% EMULSIFIABLE
CONCENTRATE" was adulterated in that its strength or purity fell below the
professed standard of quality as expressed on its labeling since the label stated:


"BARCO


DrEDLrIN


~g% ElIrUSITIABLE
CONNRATE


Contaim1,5 Ibs. Diedrin per
ACTIVE INGREDIEBNTI:
Hexacholoro-Epoxy Octabydro Dimetha
lene.....
-lene---d Compounds---- .. .--- -------
Related Compouuds- --^---- -


gallon


*By Weight


no


Naphtha-


-a ----------------
--- --


15. 83%
2. 79%
-aJ Ja^ n-c/-


I,,







152 INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT [I. .R.N.J.

"BARCO
ALDRIN

EQUIVAI7ANT 2
23% EMULSIFIABLE


Contains 2 lbs. Aldrin

(Compound 118)
Equivalent per Gallon
ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:
Hexachloro Hexahydro Dimethano Naphthalene _-_ 23. 0%
Related Comdpounads ..... --. -_--- -._--_--_ ----- 17. 5%
Petroleum Hydroearbons_ _-- __-- _- -- 52. 0%
IN .. .. .L:I 1. .N >. m -lgm i-..-..,- am -. n M I* 5
NERT INGREDIENTS .-- --- -- a -- a-- -----_- 7. 5%




GENERAL DIRECTIONS
Aldrin Equivalent 2 is an emulsifiable insecticide containing 2
pounds of Aldrn (Compound 118) equivalent per gallon.
Manufactured by

BARCO OHEMICALS, INC.

Des Moines, Iowa
*

which statements implied or represented that the product contained the equiva-
lent of 23% of Aldrin, the equivalent of two pounds Aldrin (Compound 118)
per gallon, and a total of 23% of hekeholoro hexahydro dimethano napthalene
and 17.5% of related compounds, whereas the product contained less than the
equivalent of 23% of Aldrin, less than the equivalent of two pounds Aldrin
(Compound 118) per gallon, and less than a total of 23% of hexachloro bexa-
hydro dimethano napthalene and 17.5% of related compounds.
It was alleged that the prod t "BARCO ALDRIN EQUIVALENT 2 23%
EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE" was adulterated within the meaning of the
act in that its strength or purity fell below the professed standard of quality
as expressed on its labeling since the labeling stated:

"BARcO
"A 1rcD T
t5AtFclU







201-230]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


153


ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:


Hexachloro Hexahydro Dimethano Naphthalene.-- .
Related Compounds- --_---.. -......_-_...
Petroleum Hydrocarbons ... ..-------------_
INERT INGREDIENTS------------------- -. _-


23.0%
17. 5%
52. 0%
7.5%


TOTAL_


--10.0%V1


GENERAL DIRECTIONS


Aldrin Equivalent 2 is an emulsifiable insecticide containing
of Aldrin (Compound 118) equivalent per gallon.


2 pounds


Manufactured by

BAROO CHEMICALS, INC.

Des Moines, Iowa


*


which implied or represented that the product contained the equivalent of
23% of AIdrin, the equivalent of two pounds Aldrin (Compound 118) per gallon,
and a total of 23% of hexachloro hesahydro dimethano naphthalene and 17.5%
of related compounds, whereas the product contained less than the equivalent


of 23% of Aldri
118) per gallon,
ano naphthalene
Barco Chemici
requested their
pliance with the


n, less than the equi
and less than a total
and 17.5% of related c
als Inc., Des Moines,
release under bond fo
act and consented to


valent of two pounds
of 23% of hexachloro
ompou nds.
Ia., claimed owners
r the purpose of bring
the entry of a conden


Aldrin (Compound
hexahydro dimeth-

ip of the products,
;ing them into corm-
anation decree. On


February 5, 1954, a decree of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that
the products be released to the claimant under bond.
215. Misbranding and adulteration of "MOTH-O-BLITZ." U. S. v. 597 containers,
more or less, of "MOTH-O-BLITZ." Default decree of condemnation,
forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 249. I. D. No. 27052.)
An analysis of the product "MOTH-O-BLITZ" showed that it contained 2.72%
of technical methoxychlor instead of 7% technical methoxychlor and .63% of


technical chlordane instead of 1% of tech
On March 9, 1954, the United States
California, acting upon a report by the
United States District Court a libel pray
fiscation of 597 containers, more or less,
California, alleging that the product wa


transported interstate on or about Oct
Company from Danville, Illinois.
It was alleged that the product was m
and that the label borne by the product
"Methoxychlor, Technical*.---.
Chlordane, Technical** ---


* E ii vr pn n 1R'1 292-his (


nical chlordane as claimed on the label.
Attorney for thq Southern District of
Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
'ing seizure for condemnation and con-
of "MOTH-O-BLITZ," at Los Angeles,
s an economic poison which had been


:ober


1952


by Spickelmier


Products


isbranded within the meaning of the act
stated:
. .... 7.0%
n----------------- .- 1. 1-r i hV o
- -- -. ---- .. ... iO
n-mpthnrvnhinnlo 1 1- .1-tril. n-







154


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. F. R.N. J.


"Methoxychlor,


Technical


* 7.0%"


"Chlordane,


which implied or represented that the product
methoxychlor and 1.0% of technical chlordane, w
less than 7.0% of technical methoxychlor and
chlordane.
On June 15, 1954, no claimant having appeared,


forfeiture was entered and the
the product.


United States Marshal


Technical


contained 7.0% of technical
hereas the product containig
less than 1.0% of technical

a decree of condemnation and


was ordered to destroy


Ai
EMT
chloi
inste


Adulteration and misbranding of "BARCO ALDRIN
23% EMULSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE' U. S. v. 6
ers, 15 one-gallon containers, aid 2 fltlfour gallon d
of "BARCO ALDRIN EQUIVALENT 2 23% EMU
CENTRATE" Consent decree of condemnation and
(I. F. & R. No. 236. I.AD. No. 54.)
i examination of the product "BAROO ALDRIN EQU
ILSIFIABLE CONCENTRATE" showed that it contain<
ro Hexahydro Dimethano Naphthalna~e and 1120% of
ad of 23.0% of Hexachloro Hexahydro Dimethano Nap.


EQUIVAL
five-gallon c
rums, more
LSIFIABLE
release unde


ENT 2
ontain-
or less,
CON-
r bond.


IVALENT 2 23%
ed 14.85% of Hexa-
related compounds
hthalene and 17.5%


of related compounds as claimed on the labeltg.
On September 9, 1953, the United States Attorney for the Northern
of Indiana, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, file
United States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation
fiseation of 6 five-gallon containers, 15 onegallon containers, and 2
gallon drums, more or less, of "BARCO ALDRIN EQUIVALENT
EMULSIFIABLE OCONOCBNTRAT" fat South Bend, Ind., alleging
product was an eeonomie poison wheh had been transported interstate


Dist
d in
and
ffty-f
2 2
that
ite or


rict
the
con-
tour

the
I or


about April 1, 1953, by Barco Chemicals, Inc., from Des/Moines, la., in violation
of the act.
It was alleged that the product wasbranded within the meaning of the act
and that the label stated :
"BAR'OO

EQ UIYALEN 2
23% EMCILSIFIABLE
CONO kTRTF
Contains 2 lbs. Aldrin


S(Compeun 118)
Equivslentptu GaOn
NATIVE !NGRED)IENTS:
Hetachlrd Hexkhydro ethano Naphthalene
Related Comrpounds--- -------
Petroleum lHydroe-bonsz .. _------
INET INGRi .. ------- --_-------


JITOTIAL. .. .- .- --- -- ---- -- ----


GENERAL DIREOTIONS


Aldrin Equivalent 2 -is-an
nnn ia A.Alirn it (Amnmiind


23.0%
17. 5%
52. 0%
7.5%

100. 0%


emulsifiable Insecticide containing 2
11Q\ annirolant- nar usallnk *"


*I 1~0qlo111






:20-230]
201-230]


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


155


SIt was alleged that the product was adulterated within the uneaning of the act
and.that the label stated
"BARCO
ALDRIN
EQUIVALENT 2
23% EMULSIFIABLE
CONCENTRATE
Contains 2 lbs. Aldrin
(Compound 118)


ACTIVE IN'
Hesachl
Related
Petroleu
INERT ING


Equivalent per
EDIENTS:
Hexabydro Dimethan
nmpouuds ...._.___
Hydrocarbons _
DIENTS --__


Gallon


o10 Naphthalen


e_


TOTAL----.........


100.0%


GENERAL DIRECTIONS


Aldrin Equivalent 2 is an
pounds of Aldrin (Compound
which implied or represented that th


of Aldrin,


the equivalent of


a total of 23% of H
related compounds,
23.u of Aldrin, less
gallon, and less th
Naphthalene and 17
Barco Chemicals.


2 lbs. o


esachloro Hexahydro
whereas the product
than the equivalent c
an a total of 23%
.5% of related compo


Moines


emulsifiable insecticide containing
118) equivalent per gallon. *


te product contained the equivalent of 23%
if Aldrin (Compound 118) per gallon, and


D
Ct
)f :
of
un


Iowa


'imethano Naphthalene and 17.5% of
)ntaine( less than the equivalent of
2 lbs. of Aldrin (Compound 118) per
Hexachloro Hexahydro Dimethano
ds.
, claimed ownership of the product,


requested its release under bond for the purpose of bringing it into compliance
with the act and consented to the entry of a condemnation decreee. On February
5, 1954, a decree of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product
he released to the claimant under bond.


Lack of registration and misbranding of "G
pint containers, 223 one-pint containers,
one-half-gallon containers, more of less,
of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruct
28783.)


[LAMUR." U. S. v. 121 one-half-
94 one-quart containers, and 32
of "GLAMUR." Default decree
tion. (I. F. & R. 254. I. D. No.


The product "GLAMUR" was not registered under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and the label borne by the product did not bear
an ingredient statement.


On May 14, 1954, tl
Illinois, acting upon a .
States District Court
of: 121 one-half-pint c(
and 32 one-half-gallon
Illinois alleging that th
ported interstate on or
from Syracuse, New Yo


le United
report by
i libel pra
containers,
contain


States Attor
the Secretary
ying seizure
223 one-pint c
rs, more or


te product was
about March
rk, in violation


an econ
17, 1954
of the aa


ney
of A
For c
onta
less,


for the Northern District of
agriculture, tiled inathe United
condemnation and confiscation
iners, 94 one-quart containers,
of -'GL.1MUI," at Chicago,


omic poison which had been trans-
| by Hosid Products Incorporated,


ct.


4r


:I







156


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. F. R. N.J.


"SKEETER BEATER" Units, more or less, and 579 containers, more or
less, of a product labeled "SMOLDERS." Default decree of condemna-
tion, and forfeiture. (I. F.& R. No. 259. I. D. No. 29200.)
The product "SKETER BEATER" Unit containing 1 "SKEETER BEATER"
and 12 "SMOLDERS" and the product "SMOLDERS" were not registered
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination
of the products showed that labels on the retail packages did not bear stie
ments of the net weights or measftr of th content of the container E
gredient statements, and that certain statements on the labels were false or
misleading.
On June 28, 1954, the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts,
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District Court a libel saying zseiure for condemnation and confiscation ot
1,855 "SKEETER BEATER" Units, mo or less, and 579 containers more or
less, of a product labeled "SMOLDERS" at Boston Mass., ag that
products were economic poisons which had been transported interstate on or
about May 28, 1954, by Ross Daniels, Inc., from Des Moines, Isa., in violation of
the act. None of the product "SMODERBS" was found.
It was alleged that the product "SKEETER BEATER" Unit had not been
registered with the Secretary of Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the labels of the outsie containers of the retail packages
of the "SKEETER BEATER" Unit which contained 1 "SKEETER BEATER"
and 12 "SMOLDERS" did not bear a statement of the net weight or measure
of the content
It was alleged that the labels of the retail cartons of the "SKEETER BEATER"
Unit which contained 1 "SKEE TEiR BAEAT' and 12 "SMOLDERS" did not
bear an ingredient statement giving the naes and percentages of each of the
active ingredients, together with the total percentages of the inert ingredients,
or ingredient statements giving the names of each of the active and each of
the inert ingredients in the descending order of the percentage of each present
in each classification, together with thota percentages of the inert ingredients.
It was alleged that the product "CBETER 3ATER" Unit was further mis-
branded within the meaning of the act n that the retail carton of the "SKEETER
BEATER" Unit which contained 1 "SKEETER BEATER" and 12 "SMOLDERS"
stated:


SKEETERR BEATER
BANDWAGON MFG., INC.
413 SUMMER ST.,
BOGSTON, MASS."


which implied that Bandwagon Mtg, Inc., 413 Summer St., Boston, Mass.,
the manufacturer of the product, whereas it was not.
On August 9, 1954, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the product be given by
United States Marshal to a charitable institution for use and not for sale.


219. Lack of registration and required information on la
10% DDT DUST" and S. A. C. BRAND LINI
U. S. v. 55 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of "S.
DUST," and 0 fifty-pound bags, more or les:
LINDANE COPPER DUST." Default decree of (
and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 258. I. UD No!
The products "S. A. C. BRAMND 10% D' DUST"
T VBTT L TTh WrinmTh'fnt T YCirn,,m _.~2na. .- ..- --- a--


ibels of "S. A. C. BRAND
)ANE COPPER DUST."
A. C. BRAND 10% DDT
s, of "S. A. C. BRAND
condemnation, forfeiture,
s. 29250 and 29251.)
and "S. A. C. BRAND
4.t CaA n.n I Twonaini4 aI An






201-2300]


r:ow m;s~ or


JUDGMINT


157


It was
of the act
weight or
On Aug
and forfe
destroy tl


alleged that the products further ailed
in that thelabelsborne by hprducts
measure of the content.
iust 11, 1954, no claimant having appea
iture was enteed an it was odered tl
ie products.


to comply with the provisions
did not bear statements of net


red, a decree of condemnation
hat the United States Marshal


220. Lack of registration and misbranding of "-GO." U S. v. 141 six-ounee
containers, more or less, of "O-GO." Default decree of condemnation,
forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & B. No. 257. I. D. No. 29151.)
The product "O-GO" was not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungi-
cide, and Rodenticide Act and an examination of the product showed that the
label borne by the product failed to bear an ingredient statement.
On May 19, 1954, the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts.
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of
141 six-ounce containers, more or less, of "O-GO" at Holyoke, Mass., alleging
that the product was an economic poison which had been transported interstate
on or abou t June 23, 1953, by Capco from Oleveland, Ohio, in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of Agri-
culture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was further alleged that the product was nisbranded in that its label did


not bear an ingredient statement giving the name and percentage of each of the
active ingredients, together with the total percentage of the inert ingredients,
or an ingredient statement giving the names of each of the active and each of the
inert ingredients in the descending order of the percentage of each present in
each classification, together with the total percentage of the inert ingredients.
On July 26, 1954, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered and the United States Matshal was ordered to destroy the
product.
N.sLack ob registration of "MALAMINE" and "MALO-CHLOR." U. S. a. 15
-- -


one-gallon containers, more or less, of "MALAMINY' and 47 tw
containers, more or less, of "MALO-CHLOR." Default decree
demnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & B. No. 260. I.
2823 and 29327.)


o-pound
of coa-
D. Nos.


he products "MALAMINE" and "MALO-OHLOR" were not registered under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
O tiJuily 6, 1954, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Illi-
i ting unon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
SDarict Crt a libeI praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation
S1 one-gallon containers, more or less, of "MALAMINE" and 47 two-pound
ctiners, more or less, of "MALO-OCLOR" at Peoria, Ill., alleging that the
pdts re economic poisons which had been transported interstate on or
abut Apil 20, 1954, and May 14, 1954, by Maloney Ohemical Company, from
n Bay, Wis., in violation of the act.
O ber 27, 1954, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
demnation and forfeiture was entered and the United States Marshal was
ordered to destroy the products.
222. Lack of registration f fILGRIM PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5."
ii I. & E. 10 oe-gallon containers and 1,126 one-pint containers, more or
less, of "PILGRIM PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5." Default de-
-


cree oY condemnation, forfeiture,, ain destruction. (I. F. & R. No,






158


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


MI4D


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. P. L'N.ti


On May 25, 1954, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and.
forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the United States Marshal destroy
the product.
223. Lack of registration and required information and misbranding of "INSECT-
VAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT." U. S. v. 71 "INSECT-VAPOR ELECTRIC
UNITS," more or less, and 71 leaflets, more or less, captioned "INSECT-
VAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT LIKE MAGIC." Default decree of condemna-
tion and forfeiture. (I. F. & R. No. 237. I. D. No. 27037.)
The product "INSECT-VAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT" was not registered under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of the
product showed that the outside containers or wrappers of the retai package
did not bear astatemo the net
statement of the nae 4 sa r femsa
for whom manufactured, or a statement of the name, brand or rae-marx
under which the said product was sold. An examination of the retail ard
ontann one "INSECT-VAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT" and one U5i-ounce eon-
tahner of "INECT-VAPOR CRYSTALS" also showed that they did not bea
an Ingredienstat atement
On October 11, 1953, the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona,
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District Court, a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 71
"INSECT-VAPOR ELTBPRIC UNITS," more or less, and 71 leaflets, more or
less, captioned "INECVAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT LIKE MAGIC" at Tucson.
Ariz., alleging that the product was an economic poison which had been trans-
ported interstate on or about June 9, 1958, by Insect Vapor Products Company
from Dallas, Tes., in violsaon of the eat.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by'section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the retail cartons containing one "INSECT-VAPOR
ELECTRIC lUNIT," one 5-ounce container of "INSECT-VAPOR CRYSTALS,!.
and one leaflet "INSECT-VAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT LIKE MAGIC" did not bear
on the outside containers o wrappers of the retail package of the economic
poison a statement of the net weight or measure of the content, or a statement
of the name and address of the manufacturer, registrant, or person for whom
manufactured, or a statement of the name, brand, or trade-mark under which
the article was sold.
It was further alleged that the retail cartons containing one "INSECT-VAPOR
ELECTRIC UNIT," one 5-oune container of "INSE -VAPOR C
and one leaflet "INSECT-VAPOR ELECTRIC UNIT LIKE MAGIC" did not bear
on the outside containers or wrappers of the retail package of the economic
poison an ingredient statement giving the name and percentage of each of the
active ingredients, together with the total percentage of the inert i gre
or an ingredient statement giving the names of each of the active and each of
the inert ingredients in the descending order of the percentage of each present
in each classification, together with the total percentage of the inert ingredients.
On November 172, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
demnation was entered and it was ordered that the United States Marshal release
the seized merchandise from its custody into the custody of the Superintendenat
of the Federal Prison Camp at Tucson, Ariz., or to his duly authorized repr
tentative for use as an insecticide at the prison camp, and for no other purpose.
224. Lack of registration of "PERMA-HEALTH TV CRYSTALS." "LINDANE






201-230]


N O ES: OF


159


Court, a libel praying seizuretqi condeimnafn an"d confiscation of 294 wto-gran
containers, more or less, of "PERMA-3BALa TY CRYSTALS", 23 two-ounce
containers, more or less, ot "LINDANE (INSICTICIDE)," and 21 two-ounce
bottles, more or less, of "USE ONLY: I: THE ;PER Ei-HEALTH. TV LAMP
VAPORIZER" Insecticide, alleging thatt the products were economic prisons
which bad been transported interstate o.n or about A gust 22, 1953, by Home
Maintenance from Hutchinsop, Kans., i violation of thq act.
It was alleged that the products were not rgistered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
On January 4, 1954, no claimant ivlng appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered and It Was ordered tha t the United States Marshal
destroy the products.

225. Lack of registration of 'CIPACO PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEr.5
and "FOREST FRESR PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5." U. S. v.
1,246 16-ounce bottles, more or less, of "CIPACO PINE OIL DISIN-
FECTANT COEF. 5," and 4.318 16-ounce bottles, more or less, of "FOR-
EST FRESH PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5." Consent decree
of condemnation and release under bond. (I. Ft & I. No. 241. I. D. Nos.
27978 and 27980.)
The products, 'CIPACO PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5" and "FOR-
EST FRESH PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5" were not registered under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On November 19, 1953, the United States Attorney for the Southern District
of Mississippi, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
United States District Court, a libel praying seizure of condemnation and con-
fiscation of 1.246 16-ounce bottles, more or less, of "CIPACO PINE OIL DISIN-
FECTANT COEF. 5," and 4,318 16-ounce bottles, more or less, of "FOREST
FRESH PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5" at Gulfport, Miss., alleging that
the products "CIPACO PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5" and "FOREST
FRESH PINE OIL DISINFECTANT-COEF. 5" were economic poisons which
had been transported interstate on or about June 11, 1953, July 30, 1953, Septem-
ber 9, 1953, and October 16, 1953, by Pilgrim Chemical Company from New
Orleans, La., in violation of the act.
J. E. Bailey, doing business as City Paper Company and Gulf Wholesale
Company, a corporation, both of Gulfport, Miss., claimed ownership of the
products and requested their release under bond pursuant to the act and con-
sented to the entry of a decree of condemnation, On February 15, 1954, a decree
of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the products be released
to the claimants for the purpose of bringing them into compliance with the act.
226. Lack of registration of "METRO INSECT POWDER NO. 1" and "METRO
10% DDT INSECTICIDE NO. 1." U. S. v. 238 eight-ounce containers,
more or less, of "METRO INSECT POWDER NO. 1" and 119 one-quart
containers, more or less, of "METRO 10% DDT INSECTICIDE NO. 1."
Decree of condemnation and forfeiture. (I. F. & R. No. 250. I. D. Nos.
28480 ad 28481. )
The products "MlETRO INSECT POWDER NO. 1" and "METRO 10% DDT


INSECTICIDE NO.
cide, and Rodenticid
On March 26, 195
California, acting u
United States Distr
fiscation of 238 eight


1" we
e Act.
4, the
pon a
ict Co
t-ounc
n*


re not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungi-


United States Attorney for the Southern District of
report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
irt a libel praying seizure of condemnation and con-
* containers, more or less, of "METRO INSECT POW-


I


)






160


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[ 1. P. RN. J.


227. Lack of registration of "CEDAR-SCENT MOTH REPELLENT." U. S. 9.
1,144 two-ounce containers, more or less, of "CEDAR-SCENT MOTH
REPELLENT." Consent decree of condemnation and release under bond
(I. F. & R. No. 264. I. D. No. 28982.)
The product "CEDAR-SCENT MOTH REPELLENT" was not registered undr
the Federal Insecticide, Fugicide, and Rodentiid Ac
On August 6, 1954, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia,


acting upon a report by
District Court, a libel
1,144 two-ounce contain'
LENT" at Washington,
which had been transpoJ
Room Company, Divisioj
toa otthe act.
It was ille that t
Agriculture as required I
On August 6, 1954, a
it was ordered that the


the
pray
ers,
D.C
rted
n of


Secretary of Agriculture, filed in tl
'ing seizure for condemnation and
more or less, of "CEDAR-SCENT
., alleging that the product was an
interstate on or about June 3, 1954,
Corona Mills. Inc.. from Lawrence.


ae United States
confiscation of

economic poison
by The SenIttA.
Mass.. in viola-


product was not resist rt wi~ti
by section 4 of the act.
decree of condemnation and forfeiture was entered anm
United States Marshal destroy the product.


228. Lack of registration and required information,
U. S. ,. 501 eight-ounce containers, more o
decree of condemnation and release under
I. D. No. 298315.)
The product "CARE" was not registered under th
elte1and Rodenticide Act.
An examination of the product showed that the I
a statement of the net weight or measure of the


ment) or adequate directions for use. The product was also
On July 1954, the United States Attorney for the
Iowa, acting upon a report by the bSecetary of Agricultu
States Distiet Coult, a libel praying seizure for condemn
of 51 eight-ounce containers, more or less, of "CARE"
alleging that the product was an economic poison which
Lc&LtSe -LAlm l VHe ~~ J lll dilCJU Ultii


interstate
City, Mo.,
It was
of Agricu
It was
statement


on or about February 11, fI
in violation of the act.
alleged that the prouct had
lture as required by section 4
further alleged that the label
of the net weight or measure


It was further a ed that the
of the act in that its label did not
and percentage of eac of the ac
centage of the nert ingredients, U
of each of the active and each of
of the percentage of eaeh present


)54,.


and misbranding of "CARE."
r less, of "CARE." Consent
bond. (I. F. & R. No. 261.


ie Federal Insecticide, Fungi-


abel borne by it did not bear
content, an ingredient state"


otherwise misbranded.
Southern District of
re. filed in the United
action and confiscation
at Des Moines, Iowa,
bad been transported


John's Greenhouse from Kansas


not been registered with the Secretary
of the act.
l1 borne by the product did not bear a
of the content.


dut was misbranded within the meaning
bear an ingredient statement giving the name
tive ingredients, together with the total per-
or an ingredient statement giving the names
the inert ingredients in the descending order
in each classification, together with the total


percentage of the inert ingredients.
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning


of the act in that the labeling
tons for use which are necessa
tion of the public.
It was further allied that
stated "ROSS DATIELS. INC.,


accompanying the product did not contain direc-
ry and, if complied with, adequate for the protec-

the product was misbranded in that the label
713 Mulberry, Des Moines, iowa w incn iT


or represented that "ROSS DANIELS, INC.," was the manufacturer of the
-u.^~~~~~~ ~~ ~ L_, a ,:> A:- ******* h:- ^-. .- -. --_ -* J 1 --. f -- -__ -_ _







201-230]


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


161


The products
'DALAMAR-X I
cide, Fungicide,
An exanmnati
KILLER *
"REFILL FOR


the outside (
ment of the
ingredient st
On Augus
acting upon
District Con
"DALAMA R


"DALAMAR-X


FLY KILLER"
and Rodenticid(
on of the retai
ELECTRIC WA
DALAMAR-X
ainers or wrapp
weight or measi
nent.


FLY


KILLER"


Units


"REFILL


:FOR


were not registered under the Federal Iusecti-
: Act.
1 cartons containing one "DALAMAR-X FLY
LI, MODEL VAPORIZER" and one package of
FLY KILLER DOOMANE" showed that
)ers of the retail packages did not bear a state-
ure of the contents. They also failed to bear an


t 7, 1954, the United States Attorney for the
a report by the Secretary of Airiculture, filed
rt, a libel praying seizure for condemnation an
-X FLY KILLER" Units, more or less, and 5


I
d
C


less, of "REFILL FOR DALAMAR-X FLY KILLER" at
that the products were economic poisons which had been tr


May


1954,


Doom,


Inc.,


from


V'allej o


Calif.,


District of
n the Unite
I confiscatit,
i packages,
Reno. Nev..


ansp'o


Nevada,
d States
n of 102
more or
alleging


,rted interstate


in violation


of the


It was a
Agriculture
It was al
"DALA MA
or measure
It was f
package of
ingredient


alleged that the products
k as required by section 4
leged that the outside co


R-X F
of the
further
the p
state


gredients, together
gredient statement


KILLER" Uni
tents of the co


eged
uct

'ith t
giving


ingredients in the descent
classification, together wi
On September 23, 1954,
tion and forfeiture was


that the
'DALAMA


I


were
of the
ntaine
t did n
otainel
label o
R-X I


ng the name
he total pere
the names o
ding order o:
tb the total
no claimant
entered and


not registered with the Secretary of
act.
r of the retail package of the product
,ot bear a statement of the net weight


1~i
iIL


the outside container of
Y KILLER" Unit did n1


and percentagee 0
entage of the inei
f each of the active
f the percentage (
percentage of the
having appeared,


it was


ordered


each
ingre
and
each
uert
i deer


of the
diets
each o
prese
ligred
ee of


the retail
ot bear an
active in-
, or an in-
f the inert
nt in each
ieuts.
condemga-


the United


States


Marshal destroy the products.
230. Lack of registration of "FUCO BRAND 15% FERMATE," "FUCO BRAND
DITHANE Z-78-10%," "FUCO BRAND RAT KILL," "FUCO BRAND


1% SUPER A-P 1% ENDRIN TOBACCO
TOMATO DUST CALCIUM ARSENAT
and "FUCO BRAND TOMATO DUST 6.2%
U. S. L. 15 fifty-pound bags, more or less,
FERMATE;" 3 fifty-pound bags, more or
DITHANE Z-78-10%;" 7 fifty-pound bags,
BRAND RAT KILL;" 20 fifty-pound bags,
BRAND 1% SUPER A-P 1% ENDRIN TOBA(
bags, more or less, of "FUCO BRAND TOMA1
ARSENATE, NOT LESS THAN 20%;" and 21


DUST," "FUCO BRAND
E NOT LESS THAN 20%,"
DITHANE-3% D. D. T."
of "FUCO BRAND 15%
less, of "FUCO BRAND
more or less, of "FUCO
more or less, of "FUCO
CCO DUST;" 20 fifty-pound
rO DUST ** CALCIUM
1 fifty-pound bags, more or


less, of "FUCO BRAND TOMATO DUST 6.2% DITHANE-3% D. D. T."
Decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No.
256. I. D. Nos. 29228, 29229, 29230, 29234, 29235, 29237.)


The
Z-78-1
ENDR
CIUM
DUST
Insect


products "FUCO BRAND 15% FERMATE," "FUCO BRAND DITHANE
0%," "FUCO BRAND RAT KILL," "FUCO BRAND 1% SUPER A-P 1%


IN


TOBACCO


DUST,"


ARSENATE NOT LESS
6.2% DITHANE--3% D,
tide, Fungicide, and Rodel


"FUCO


BRAND


THAN 20c%,


* D.
ntici


TOMATO


" and


"FUCO


DUST


* aL-


BRAND TOMATO


T." were not registered under the Federal
de Act.


I


I
l
k







162~


U (SIOTIC ID N


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I. F. R. N. J.


April 3, 1954, and April 13, 1954 by Fuco Chemical Co., from ]
violation of the act.
None of the products "FUCO BRAND 15% FERMATE,"
DITHANE Z-78--10%," and "FUCO BRAND TOMATO DUST
ARSENATE NOT LESS THAN 20%" was found.
It was alleged that the products were not registered with
Agrilture as required by section 4 of the act.
On September 20, 1954, no claimant having appeared, a dec
tion and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that t
Marshal destroy the products.


INDEX TO NOTICES O


N.j; No.


Barco Adrin Equivalent 2 28%
Emulsifiable Concentrate
Barco Chemicals, Inc_.._...-
Barco Dieldrin 15% Emulsifiable
Concentrate and Barco Aldrin
Equivalent 2 23% Emulsisable
Concentrate
Barco Chemicals, Inc__-_----
Barco Toxaphene 60% Emulsifable
Concentrate
Barco Chemicals, Inc..______-
arco ll2% JB..C. Dust concentrate
Barco Chemicals, Inc.._......
Bug Death Units
Bug Death, Inc__ -_.____ _-


Care


John's Greenhouse.___.____
Cedar-Scent Moth Repellent
The Scent-A-Room Co., Divi-
sion of Corona Mills, ien....
Cipaco Pine Oil Disinmeetant-
Coef, 5 and Forest Fresh Pine Oil
Disinfectant-Coet. 5
Pilgrim Chemical Con-u... -
S. L. Cowley Rat & Mouse Bait
Cowley Manufacturing Co-..
Dalamar-X Fly Killer Units and
Refill for Dalamar-X Fy Kiler
Fly Doom, Inc__..._. __.--
15% Aldrin for Experimental Par-
poses Only
Reasor-Hill Corp.----.....
"Fly Gone" Fly and Insect Killer
and Pure Lindane Insecticide
The Home Mfg. & Sales Oo.--
uco Brand 15% Fermate, Fuco.
Brand Dithane Z-78-10%, Fueo


Brand
Sunier


i Rat Kill, P1ce Brand 1%
KA-P 1i4 Endrin Thamdn


214





210

228


227




211






u0s


L


ive Oak, Fla., in

"FUCO BRAND

the Secretary of


ree of condemna-
he United States


JUDGMENT 201-230


N. J. No.
Glamur
Hosid Products, Inc______---- 217
Insect-Vapor Electric Unit
Insect Vapor Prods f-lt..
Malamine and Malo-Chlor
Maloney Chemical Co--...... 221
Metho-Nox Insecticide Refill for
Columbia Automatic Insecticider
Vaporizer and Coldane Chemical
Refll for Fly Control Unit
Columbia Chemical Co., Inc... 204
Metro Insect. Powder No. 1 and
Metro 10% DDT Insecticide No. 1
Imperial Products Co. a__-_ _
Mortron Vaporizer with Mortane
and Mortane Exterminator Cor-
poration of America .......... 202
Naco Lucky Seed Bed No. 30 4-9-3
Naco Fertilizer Co---........... 207

Capeo. .....--- ---...... ---........ 220
Perma-Health TV Crystals, Lin-
dane (Insecticide) and Use Only
in the Perma-Health TV Lamp
Vaporier
Home Maintenance ----- 224
Pilgrim Pine Oil Disinfectant- -
Coef. 5
Pilgrim Chemical Co-------- 222
Red Cap Bleach Dis-
infectant
C. M. Kimball Co-.....____.. 208
S.A.C. Brand 10% DDT Dust and
S.A.C. Brand Lindane Copper
Dust
Mixon Seed Co.....------ --- 219
Self-Spraying Moth-O-Blitz
Spickelmier Products Co-..... 215
Skeeter Beater Units and Smolders
Rnnss flnisls. Tn .- __-_- S218













































H
WI

h

I






I
I...
I:
I!:
Ii!
H.
If
p



"H'
51
a.
ri.








UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA



IIII IIfiIIIEIh 1lIIl lIllI I
3 1262 08588 8328

iliii

*"!i


I

=:|
.ii
N!!



*::i::l





























ii
:= ii~i



ili
"i l i














































.1*
*:::::



















*:













iii:
:*iiii
























"i::
*ii
*:..::.























.i"
:.ii


I:::