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
Running title:
Notices of judgment
N.J., I.F.R
Physical Description:
v. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Dept. of Agriculture. -- Production and Marketing Administration
Publisher:
The Administration
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 )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
law report or digest   ( marcgt )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
United States Department of Agriculture, Production and Marketing Administration.
Dates or Sequential Designation:
1-25 (issued Oct. 1950)-134-169 (issued Apr. 1953).
General Note:
Title from caption.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 004700304
oclc - 01768639
lccn - sn 98047302
Classification:
lcc - SB951 .U51
System ID:
AA00008506:00003

Related Items

Succeeded by:
Notices of judgment under the federal insecticide, fungicide, and rodenticide act

Full Text


I.-


r


NOV


1950


Issued October 1950


STATES DEPARTMENT OF


AGRICULTURE


PRODUCTION AND MARKETING ADMINISTRATION


JUDGMENT
FUNGICIDE,


UNDER


AND


THE


FEDERAL


RODENTICIDE


INSECTICIDE,


ACT


1-25


i!:' i. .5"w ''
ile notices of judgment herewith relate to cases instituted in the United
,em courts and are approved for publication, as provided in section 6 of the
*eSn Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U. S. C. 1946 ed. Supp.
RE=& 8515k) .
II:i' H. E. REED,
Director of the Livestock Branch,
.-U Production and Marketing Administration.
.ASrNOTON, D. C., July 26, 1950.


..of "NVelo Brand Rat Paste." U. S. v. 270 two-ounce containers,
ore or less, of "*Velo Brand Rat Paste." Default decree of condemnation,
eAtunre, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 1. I. D. Nos. 17519 and 17417.)
sahmination of two samples of "Velo Brand Rat Paste" showed an average


of 12.5


inWe~WB&P, s


percent below the net weight claimed on the labeling


1948, the United States Attorney for the District of Mary-
report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
ing seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 270 two-
lore or less, of "Velo Brand Rat Paste" at Baltimore, Md.,
he product was an economic poison which had been trans-


mAtgate on or abo
o ,toe., from New
. e nd Rodenticide
fet was alleged
" bIrne on the labels


ut July 16, 1948, by the Velodent Products Manufac-
York, N. Y., in violation of the Federal Insecticide,
Act.
to be misbranded in that the statement. "Net Weight


affixed to the packa


of t


:1


1 served to deceive and mislead purcha
at the net weight of the packages was
t weight of the packages was less than 2 o
S24, 1949, no claimant having appeared,
was entered, and it was ordered that th


e produce
sers, sine
not less
ounces.
a decree c
e product


t, was false and
e the statement
than 2 ounces,
)f condemnation
be destroyed.


S. registration and required information on label and misbranding of
N ~Odo-Wick." U. S. v. 60 bottles, more or less, of "Pilgrim Odo-
a. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F.


.. No. 2. I. D. No. 17587.)
prtdfuet, "Pilgrim Odo-Wick,"
ilde, Fungicide, and Rodenticid
tthat the labels on the contain


was


not registered


under


Federal


e Act, and an examination of the product
rs of the product did not bear a statement







INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT [N. J., I. B. ,


It was alleged that
section 8 of the act in t
did not bear a state
bottles.
It was alleged that
to the bottles contain
giving the name and
with the total percent
giving the names of e


: the product failed to comply with the provisions of
hat the labels affixAd to the bottles containing the product
ent of the net weight or measure of the contents of the


the
uing
per
age
ach


Product was misbranded
the product did not bear
centage of each of the ac
of the inert ingredients, oi
* of the active and each ol


in that the labels affixed
an ingredient statement
tive ingredients, together
r an ingredient statement
F the inert ingredients ia


the descending order of


together with t


It wa
ments:
CAUSE
Unscrew
in the


spray
were
ments
the ai
would
On


ie total


s alleged that
"PILGRIM OD
RESPIRATOR
7 cap and pull ot01
air banishing
nnthing to h


Iur


the percentage of each present in
rcentage of the inert ingredients.
e product was further misbranded


WICK *
COLDS *
wick from one
1 unpleasant
n Ahsnluiitel


* KILL GER
ODO-WIC
to three inches.
odors. It's ti
uiteo hnrno nn


MS
K i
O
at
tho


each classification,


IN T
s so
do-Wi
easy
Inhlb


that the state-
'HE AIR THAT
easy to use .
ick will vaporize
...nothing to
Q ntf tho nrndlutt


. a t.y tt 9 t, pa t a a e ,- a- r -,
false and misleading and served to deceive and mislead, since the state-
Srepresented that the product when used as directed would kill germs in.
r that cause respiratory colds, whereas the product when used as directed
not kill such germs.


May


1949,


no claimant


having


appeared,


a decree of


condemnation


and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
3. Lack of registration and misbranding of "Insecticided BycoHlfe FertilizUer."
IU. S. v. 23 two-pound cartons, 31 Ave-pound cartons, 35 ten-pound eartonem,
6 twenty-five-pound bags, and 2 one hundred-pound bags, more or lessm, of
"Inseetieided BycoHlfe Fertilizer." Consent decree of condemnation, forfei-
ture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 6. I. D. No. 17451.)
The product "Insecticided Bycolife Fertilizer" was not registered under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and an examination of the


product showe
ingredient stat
that it was a
present.
On April 22
North Carolina
District Court
two-pound car
pound bags, an
Fertilizer," at
poison which
Bycolife Fer til
It was alle
Agriculture as
SIt was alleg
the cartons ar
ment as require


d that the labels on the containers of the product did not bear an
ement as required by the act. An analysis of the product showed
commercial fertilizer and that no insecticidal ingredients were


, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Western District of
, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 23
tons, 31 five-pound cartons, 35 ten-pound cartons, 6 twenty-five-
d 2 one hundred-pound bags, more or less, of "Insecticided Bycolife
Charlotte, N. C., and alleging that the product was an economic
had been transported interstate on or about March 3, 1949, by


izer Manufacturing Co.,
ged that the product V
required by section 4 of
ed that the product wa
id bags containing the
ed by the act.


from Clinton,


S.C.


, in violation of the act,


ras not registered with the Secretary of
the act.
s misbranded in that the labels affixed to
product did not bear an ingredient state-


It was further alleged that the product was misbranded in that the statements:


' (1) "INSECT
FLOWERS SH
VINIZED INS
Blooded Insecti
Tomatoes, Potal
ra we- a :wA- me sa


ICIDED BYCOLIFE
RUBS TREES ROSES


EXIT
s *
toes,
wwwry n


FERTILIZER
* THE


FOR: VEGETABLES
COMPLETELY VITA-


ICIDED PLANT FOOD Tested Many Years for
* Follow These Directions: VEGETABLES:
Cabbage or any other vegetable, use as you would an o:
Wt Ah n i w j A A..rwrnnA i nnncmnrm a wn* e a .WS n Mno runj" w1 n v 4 em n..


White
Beans,
ordinary
n WWnan .1..


b.


-


c~ ~~


.




H" Ir ~**************** I'1fIU:1DHE"


HHll,"J^. '
::** :::{ .... *
511: ,.. 1 NOTICES 01

I. gpouct was packed, were false and m
| .d since they represented that the p
S'Std when used as directed was of ins4
nonpoisonous to red-blooded animals an
Iood, whereas the product contained n
directed, had no insecticidal value, was
animals, and was not a nonburning or
On August 30, 1949, the intervenors a
that the condemnation of the product
and forfeiture was entered, and it was


F JUDGMENT


'4:.


misleading and served to deceive and mis-
roduct contained insecticidal ingredients
ecticidal value and that the pndbet waM
d was a nonburning or nonpoisonous plant
'o insecticidal ingredients, when used as
not entirely nonpoisonous to red-bModed
nonpoisonous plant food.
nd respondents in the case having agree
vas warranted, a decree of condemnatione
ordered that the product be destroyed.


4. Lack of registration and required Information on label and misbranding 4t
"Howco Brand Rat and Mouse Embalmer." U. S. v. S68 cans, more or less, of
"Howeo Brand Rat and Mouse Embalmer." Default decree of condemnation,
forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 7. I. D. No. 19862.)


The prod


under


the


tion of the
did not bear
. tainers and
On June
Florida, act
trict Court


uct "Howco Brand Rat and Mouse Embalmer" was not registered
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examina-
product showed that the labels on the containers of the product
Sa statement of the net weight or measure of the contents of the con1
an ingredient statement as required by the act.
2, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of


upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dir-
ibel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 68


cans, more or less, of "Howco Brand Rat and Mouse Embalmer" at Jacksonville,
Fla., and alleging that the product was an economic poison which had been
transported interstate, on or about February 25, 1949, by the Johnson Tire Sufr


ply Co., from Montgomery, Ala., in vi
It was alleged thnt the product
Agriculture as required by section 4
'It was alleged that the product fai
borne by the product did not bear a
tents.
It was alleged that the product
act in that the labels affixed to the
ingredient statement giving the na
ingredients, together with the total
ingredient statement giving the naz
inert ingredients in the descending
eah classification, together with th


olation of the act.
was not registered with the Secretary of
of the act.
led to comply with the act in that the labels
statement of net weight or measure of con-

vas misbranded within the meaning of the
containers of the product did not bear an
me and percentage of each of the active
percentage of the inert ingredients, or an
ues of each of the active and each of the
order of the percentage of each present in
e total percentage of the inert ingredients


Oh July 14, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.


5. Lack of registration and mishranding of "Crude Naphthalene Flakes." 1T. S.
v. 47 three and one-half-pound packages, more or less, of "Crude Naphtha-
lene Flakes." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
(T. 1. & R. No. 11. I. D. No. 17767.)
ShJe product "Crude Naphthalene Flakes" was not registered under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of the product
showed.that the ingredient statement on the labels of the product did not appear
bn the front panels of the immediate containers of the product and the term
PInert Ingredients" in such statement was in smaller-sized type and was less
prominent than the term "Active Ingredients"; that the net weight of the product
was less than the 31 pounds claimed on the labels, and that the product did dot
control-fungus diseases as claimed on the label.
* "flu Ynna 0 1l/tO Eba flni*nA^ CiQttae A&ttna-rnnn v Ptfi. ho-^ flitif nF Ararnnn atonwT


:


I







INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODE&_NTICIDE


ACT [N. J., I. t'.


affixed to the containers of the product, were false and misleading and served to
deceive and mislead, as the net weight of the product was less than 8% pounds
when packed and the product when used as directed would not control fungus
diseases as claimed.
It was alleged that the product was further misbranded in that the ingredient
statement appearing on the labels of the containers of the product did not appear
on that part of the immediate containers (front panel) which was presented or
displayed under customary conditions of purchase and the term "Inert Ingredi-
ents" appeared in smaller-sized type and was less prominent than the term "Active
Ingredients."
On September 21, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
6. Lack of registration and required information on label and misbrandlng of
"Rodent Control." U. S. v. 670 cartons, more or less, containing 12 cartridges
each, of "Rodent Control." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and


destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 12. I.D. No. 17765.)
The product "Rodent Control" was not registered under the Federal Insecti-
erie, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of the product showed
that the labels borne byj eoptqiers of the product did not bear a statement
of net weight sur of as ajwtents of the containers and did not desig-
nate the active amad ats *oduct as such; and that the labeling of the
product bore tee Mt ileas statements implying that the product was
registered uder the .et.
On June 8UA W the init9,d $tate Attorney for the District of Oregon, acting
upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court a
libel, praying seizure for condemnation antlisa aion of aeo


less, cotat~ig12 cartridges each,


alleging
interstate
Co., fromi


that the product was
e on or about August
-n I- '* a *


of "Rodent


Control"


an economic poison which


27, 1948, by the
olation of the act.


It was auegeu tat the product was
riculture as required by section 4 of the r
It was alleged that the product furtd
the labels, bone on the cartridges cont
ment of net weigt o measure of conter


Special


at Salem


, Oreg., and


I


had been transported
Effects Manufacturing


not registered with the Secretary of Ag-
ct.
er failed to comply with the act in that
aining the product, did not bear a state-


It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of said ,
act in that the statement "Economic Poison registered No. 1102." borne on the
labels affixed to the~ containers of the product, was false and misleading and .
served to deceive e mislead, as the statement implied that the product had
been registered underthe act, tras it had not been so registered.
It was alleged that the product was further misbranded in that the active
ingrt.ients of the product were not so designated on the labels of the containers i


o the poduet.
On September 21, 1949, no claimant
ion and ftorfeitwe was etered, and
atroyed.


having appeared
it was ordered


7. Lek pf registration and misbranding of "Quick Ac
v. 12 pints and 11 quarts, more or less, of "Quick Act
deereb of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction
No. 1*04f.)


he product "Quick Action flce Spra
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
ahnawi that thn l9hA"im n the pnntninorc


y" was not regis
Act, and an exa
I nf tho nrnmllt't v


, a decree of condemna-
that the product b6
H
tion Lice Spray." U. S .
ion Lice Spray." Default -
. (I. F. & R. No. 13. I.D.
itered under the Federal
nomination of the product
id nnt hosr an ingrp ilent


K







1.-28]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


gredients, together with the total p
ingredient statement giving the nan
inert ingredients in the descending 4
each classification, together with the
On August 13, 1949, no claimant h
and forfeiture was entered, and it w
the College of Agriculture of the Uni
its use.
8. Lack of registration of "Cooke's Bi
V. 16 four-ounce bottles, more oi
Emnulsifiable." Default decree ol
(I. F. & R. No. 14. I. D. No. 16948.p
The product "Cooke's Bug-Shot 4'
iMtered under the Federal Insecticidi
On June 10, 1949, the United States


upon a report by the Secretary
praying seizure for condemnati<
or less, of "Cooke's Bug-Shot
and alleging that the product
ported interstate on or about N
from Van Nuys, Calif., in violat
It was alleged that the pro
Agriculture as required by secti


On August 13, 1949, no claimant
and forfeiture was entered, and it
to the Soil Conservation Service, U


Tucson


, Ariz.,


percentagee of the inert ingredients, or an
ies of each of the active and k of the
order of the percentage of each present n
? total percentage of the inert ingredients.
having appeared, a decree of condemnation
'as ordered that the product be released to
diversity of Arizona, a publite institution, for

ig--Sbot 40% Chlordane Emulsflable." U. S.
r less, of "Cooke's Bug-Shot 40% Chlordane
f condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.

0)% Chlordane Emulsifiable" was not reg-
e, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
Attorney for the District of Arizona, acting


of Agriculture, filed in the District Court a libel
3n and confiscation of 16 four-ounce bottles, more


40%
was
ovem
ion o
duct
ion 4


Chlordane E
an economic
iber 17, 1948, b
f the act.
was not regi
of the act.
having appeal
was ordered
united States I


a public institution, for its use.


mulsifiable" at Tucson, Ariz.,
poison which had been trans-
)y Cooke Laboratory Products,


stered


with


Secretary


red, a decree of condemnation
that the product be released
Department of Agriculture, at


9. Lack of registration and mishran
Ing Powder." U. S. v. 17 twe
Bug-Shot 5% Chlordane Dustir
forfeiture, and destruction. (
The product "Cooke Bug-Shot 5
istered under the Federal Insecti
examination of the product showE
less than the 12 avoirdupois ounces
On June 10, 1949, the United Stat
upon a report by the Secretary of
praying seizure for condemnation a
more or less, of "Cooke Bug-Shot
Ariz., and alleging that the produ
transported interstate on or abou


Products,
It was
Agricultu
It was
act in tha


to the contain
and mislead
ounces.
On August
forfeiture wi
Soil Conserv
Ariz_. a nnhli


from Van Nuys,
alleged that th<
re as required by
alleged that the
t the statement "


Calif., in
e produce
section
product
net weig


h


ding of "Cooke Bug-Shot 5% Chlordane Dust-
lve-ounce packages, more or less, of "Cooke
1g Powder." Default decree of condemnation,
I. F. & R. No. 15. I. D. No. 16949.)
% Chlordane Dusting Powder" was not reg-


icide, Fungi


ddice


ed that the net
claimed on the
es Attorney for 1
Agriculture, file(
(nd confiscation
5% Chlordane
ct was an econ
t November 17
violation of the


t was not
4 of the act.


h, and Rodenticide Act. An
weight of the product was
labels of the product.
the District of Arizona, acting
d in the District Court a libel
of 17 twelve-ounce packages,
Dusting Powder," at Tucson,
omic poison which had been
, 1948, by Cooke Laboratory
act.


registered


with


the Secretary


was misbranded within the meaning of the
ht 12 avoir ounces," borne on the labels affixed


ners of the product, was false and misleading and served to deceive
since the net weight of the product was less than 12 avoirdupois

13, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
Is entered, and it wan ordered that the product be released to the
aoion Service, United States Department of Agriculture, at Tucson,
io institItion fir its IIse.


ii







INSE)CTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT [N. J., r.


It was alleged that the product
Agriculture as required by section 4
On August 13, 1949, no claimant
and forfeiture was entered, and it
the College of Agriculture, Universit


was not registered with the Secretary of
of the act. .:
having appeared, a decree of condemnation
was ordered that the product be released to
Ly of Arizona, a public institution, for its use.


.1. Lack of registration of "Getz Theraseptte." U. 5. v. 11 cartons, more or lei,
containing 12 ten-cc, vials of "Gets Theraseptic." Default decree of eon-
demnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 17. I. D. No. 16881.)
The product "Getz Theraseptic" was not registered under the Federal Insecti-


cide, Ft
On J
Michigi
District
11 cart
Grand
which I


ingicide, and Ro
une 20, 1949, t
an, acting upon
t Court a libel,
ons, more or e
Rapids, Mich.,
had been transp


identicide Act.
he United States Attorney


a report by
praying seiz
ss, containing
and alleging
orted intersta


William Getz Corp., from Chicago, I
It was alleged that the product
culture as required by section 4 of
On September 14, 1949, no claims
and forfeiture was entered, and it


Lack of registration a
'(I. 'L- I
D et^" *i'if Iro g et"M- j" P "^If '^ -" pt- ^ idP?:pltlllll~Bf~t B:


Bk


II.


wa


a requtrei
sos.
No *60.
ag< .:
B^^~o ^^


the Secretary of
ure for condemn
120$c.vials o
that the product
te on or about No
, in violation of the
s not registered wi
e act.
having appeared,


Western


Agricultu
tion and

was an e
vember 2
act.
th the Se


District of


re, filed in
confiscation


ucuuutpuu .
economicc poison
9, 1948, by The

cretary of Agri-


a decree of condemnation


s ordered that the product be destroyed.
I information on label muand misbranding of
v. 420 tubes, more or less, of "Gas Rodent
condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
)


The product "Gas Rodent Destroyer"
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rod"t"tide
showed that the labels borne by the co
statement of net weight or measure of
not bear aa ingredient statement as requ


On June 22
Michigan, acting
District Oot t
420 tubes, more
alleging that th
interstate on or
Ill, in violation


1949, the United
g upon a report
a libel, praying


States
by the
seizure


was not
Act. An
ntainers o
the center
ired by the
Attorney
Secretary
for cond(


registered under the Federal
examination of the product
f the product did not bear a
its of the containers and did
Sact.


for
rof
?mn


the Western District
Agriculture, filed in
action and confiscation


or less, of "Gas Rodent Destroyer" at Benton Harbor, Mich., and
e product was an economic poison which had been transported
about April 9, 1949, by the Corn Belt Chemical Co., from Chicago,
of the act ..


It was alleged that the product was
Agriculture as required by section 4 of t
It was alleged that the product further
the labels affixed to the tubes containing
of net weight or measure of the contents.
It was alleged that the product was
act in that the labels affixed to the tub
a: ingredient statement giving the nam


Ingredients, together iv it
ingredient statement giv
nesit ingedients in the,
each classification, togetl
On .August 3, 1949, no
and forfeiture was enter


h the t
ing the
descend
her witi
claim
ed. and


not registered with the Secretary of
he act.
r failed to comply with the act in that
g the product did not bear a statement

misbranded within the meaning of the
es containing the product did not bear
e and percentage of each of the active


otal percentage of the inert ingredients1 or an
names of each of the active and each of the
ing order of the percentage of each present in
i the total percentage of the inert ingredients.
nt having appeared, a decree of condemnation
it was ordered that the product be released to


the Federal Correctional Institution, at Milan, Mich., for its use.




** ni
H *..


Z~fl


NOT19~S


JUDGMENT


ported interstate on or about April 20, 1949, by the Abesto
from Michigan City, Ind., in violation of the act.
1 It was alleged that the product was not registered with
culture as required by section 4 of the act.
- It was alleged that the product further failed to compi;
the labels affixed to the containers of the product did not b
weight or measure of the contents.
It was further alleged that the product was misbrande


ofqthe act in that thi
an ingredient staten
ingredients, together
ingredient statement
inert ingredients in
each classification, t
On July 20, 1949,
condemnation and f(
be released to the F


Manufacturing Corp.,

the Secretary of Agri-

y with the act in that
ear a statement of net

d within the meaning


e labels affixed to the containers of the product did not besr
Eent giving the name and percentage of each of the active
r with the total percentage of the inert ingredients, or an
t giving the namiues of each of the active and each of the
the descending order of the percentage of each present in
together with the total percentage of the inert ingredients.
with the consent of the owner of the product, a decree of
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product
federal Correctional Institution, at Milan, Mich., for its use.


14. Lack of registration of "Hyllite Wall Paint ." U. S. v. 5 fifty-pound drums
of "White Hylite Wall Paint," etc. Consent decree of condemnation and
release under bond. (I. F. & R. No. 51. I. D. No. 20732.)
The product "Hylite Wall Paint," of various colors, was not registered under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On October 14, 1949, the United States Attorney for the District of Massa-
chusetts, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District


Court a libel, pra
drums of "White
Wall Paint," 36 fi
packages of "Rob
Hylite Wall Paint


ying seizure
Hylite Wall
ve-pound pac


in's Ej
," 48 fi


pound packages of "C
Hylite Wall Paint,"
24 five-pound package
of "Blue Hylite Wall
ing that the product
state on or about Aug


;g Hylite
iye-pound
y Hylite
five-poui
f "Green
int," mor
s an econ
t 10, 194S


for condemnat
Paint," 35 five
ages of "Ivor


SWall Paint
I packages of
Wall Paint,'
nd packages
Hylite Wall
e or less, at
omic poison
, March 28,


1949, by the Carbola Chemical Co., Inc., from
of the act.


It was alleged that the
culture as required by sect
Carbola Chemical Co.,
ownership of the product
bringing it into compliance
nation decree. On Janua
it was ordered that the pr


ion and confiscation of 5 50-pound
-pound packages of "White Hylite
y Hylite Wall Paint," 48 five-pounq
," 48 five-pound packages of "Buff
S"Rose Hylite Wall Paint," 48 five-
' 12 five-pound packages of "Peach
of "Canary Hylite Wall Paint,"
Paint," and 12 five-pound packages
West Springfield, Mass., and alleg-
which had been transported inter-
1949, July 22. 1949, and August 25,
Natural Bridge, N. Y., in violation


product was not registered with the Secretary
ion 4 of the act.
Inc., a corporation, of Natural Bridge, N. Y.,
, requested its release under bond for the pu
e with the act, and consented to the entry of a
ry 12, 1950. a decree of condemnation was ent
oduct be released to the claimant under such t


of Agri-

claimed
rpose of
condem-
ered and
Pond.


15. Lack of registration and required Information on label of Walkerfume.e
U. S. v. 479 one-pint bottles, more or less, of "Walkerfume." Defaultdeeree
of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (1. F. & R. No. 21. ID. No.
19869.)
The product "Walkerfume" was not registered under the Federal Insecticide,


Fungicide, and
the product con
labels borne by
nrinftoAl in roil


Rodenticide Act. An examination of the product showed that
stained a substance in quantities highly toxic to man and that the
the containers of the product did not bear the word "POISON"


Ira
48
s o
Pa
a;us
rus


"4,~f







INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


RODEINTICIDE


ACT [N.J.,IP. 1.


On August 2, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
16. Lack of registration, mlsbranding, and atlulteration of "Walker-Chlor 48-rn
AMl-Purpose Chlordane Inseettclde." IT. S. v. 23 one-pInt bottles, more or
less, of "Walker-Chlor 48-E AII-Purpese Chlordane Inseetlclde." Default
decree of condemnation, forfeiture, anW destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 25. I. D.
No. 19870.)
The product "Walker-Chlor 4S-E All-Purpose Chlordane Insecticide" was not
registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An


examination of the product showed that the product contained less than the 48
percent of chlordane and less than the 1 pound per quart of technical chlordane
claimed on the labels of the product, and that the claims made on the labels were
otherwise false and misleading.
Em "Tune 2T, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Middle District of
Georga, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis-


tflet Court
niit bottles.


a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation
More or less. of "Walker-Chlor 48-E All-Purpose Chlord


n of 23 one-
ane Insecti-


a. a
cide," at Nashville, Ga., and alleging that the product was an economic poison
which had been transported interstate on or about March 8, 1949, by the Walker
Fertilizer Co., from Orlando, Fla., in violation of the act.
It was aUeg that the prod*t wbManot registered with the Secretary of Agri-
culture as required by section 4e1 the set.
It was alleged that the labels of the product bore the following statements:
"ACTIVE INGQEDI TS-ehnial Chlordane 48% ONE
QUART OF WALR-CLOR CONTAINS ONE POUND OF TECHNICAL
CHLORDANE" and "WAKER-CHLOR 48-E ALL-PURPOSE CHLORDANE
INSECTICIDE FOR VTAB ANIMALS AND BUILDINGS
* DIRECTIONA4GItICULTURAL INSECTS: Walker-Chlor 48-E is
effectiive against a wide range of ro p insects, including mole crickets, army
worms, cutworms, grasshoppers, various leaf-eating worms, aphids, leaf miners,
thrips stink bugs, squah bugs, chinhMugs, flea beetles, leafhoppers, Colorado
tato beetle, ants, and certain otherdnets. Dilute 1 to 400 with water an tor-
oughly spray foliage. SE BEB or LAWNS can be either sprinkled or sprayed
with this solution to control mole epikets, ants, cutworms, army worms and chinch
bugs. ANIMAL INSECTSb Walker-Chlor 48-E has shown superior
killing power against ticksUice stable flies, horn flies, chiggers, fleas, ants,
mosquitoes and certain other insects. Dip or spray animals (except cats and
milk cows) in a 1 to 200 water diuia~ For barns or surfaces spray with a
1 to 25 or 1 to 50 water dilution. HOHStHOLD INSECTS: Walker-Chlor 48-E
gives very effective, lasting control of resistant insects such as roaches, water
bugs, bedbugs, fleas, ants and certain other insects. Dilute 1 to 25 or 1 to 50 with
water and spray around baseboards, cracks, crevices, and insect run-ways. It
was alleged that the product was misbranded in that such statements were false
and leading and seved to deceive and mislead prospective purchasers, since
they represented that the product contained not less than 48 percent chlordane
Sno t less than 1 pound per quart of technical chlordane, that the product was
A aflnrpose iniseeticide, that when used as directed it would control the insects
named, that it would not leave dangerous residues on food crops, and that it
would not be injurious to ecurbit crops; whereas the product contained less


tan 48 percent of chlordane and le
bChlordane, was not an anl-purpose inse
Control the insects named, would leave
would be injurious to cucurbit crops.


ss than 1 pound per quart of technical
cticide, when used as directed would not
e dangerous residues on food crops, and


- -..--. A 1- --3 -


A. 1.- A.! I a ..J.I.. .J


~WD







2i4S31


'NOTICES


JUDGMENT


ingredient statement on the labels of the produce
of the immediate containers which is presented o
conditions of purchase.
On July 12, 1949, the United States Attorney
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of
trict Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation
bottee, more or less, of "Makon's Arbortox '64',"
that the product was an economic poison which ha
on or about April 30, 1949, by the Makon Chemicals


in violation of the act.
It was alleged that
nculture as required by
It was alleged that
the labels of the conta


t did not appear on the part
ir displayed under customary

for the Northern District of
Agriculture, tiled in the Dis-
n and confiscation of 11 quart
at Chicago, Ill., and alleging
id been transported interstate
, Inc., from Ann Arbor, Mich.,


the product was not registered with the Secretary of Agri-
section 4 of tie act.
the product further failed to comply with the act in that
iners of the product did not bear a statement of net weight


or measure of the contents.
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded in that the ingredient
statement appearing on the labels of the containers of the product did not ap-
pear on that part of the immediate containers which was presented or displayed
under customary conditions of purchase.
On November 2, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation


and forfeiture was


entered, and


it was


ordered that the product be destroyed.


18. Lack of
U. S.
D.D.
(I. F.
The prod


registration and misbranding of "Blitz Brand Contains 5% D. D. T."
v. 54 one-quart bottles, more or less, of "Blitz Brand Contains 5%
T." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
& R. No. 29. I. D. No. 20054.a
uct "Blitz Brand Contains 5% D. D. T." was not registered under


the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of the
product showed that the labels on the containers of the product did not bear
an ingredient statement as required by the act.


On Jul
Texas, ac
Court a
guart bot
Augustine


bad been
Co., from
It was
Agricultu
It was
the conta


y 15, 1949.


the United


States


Attorney


ting upon a report by the Secretary o1
libel, praying seizure for condemnat
tles, more or less, of "Blitz Brand
e, Tes., and alleging that the produce
transported interstate on or about A
Shreveport, La., in violation of the ac
alleged tliat the product was not r
re as required by section 4 of the act.
further alleged that the product was
iners of the product did not bear an


-- a


for the Eastern


District


F Agriculture, filed in the I
ion and confiscation of 5
Contains 5% D. D. T.,"
t was an economic poison
pril 4, 1949, by the Ocean


t.
registered


with


District
i4- one-
at San
which
Coffee


the Secretary


misbranded in that the labels of
ingredient statement giving the


correct name and percentage by weight of each of the active ingredients or an
. ingredient statement giving the correct names of each of the active iugredientz
in the descending order of the percentageoqtepih eat.
On November 10, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it wtw ordwe4 tat the product be destroyed.

19. Lack of registration and required information on label and misbranding of
"Ocean Spray Insecticide TontaMs 5% DD. WT." U. S. v. 47 one-
quart bottles, and 96 one-pint bottles, umore my less, o MOeam Spray Inseeti-
e .* Mbntatns 5% D. fl T." Xefaultde-reeo f tondemnation, for-
feiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 8 L t D0S. 20055.)
The product "Ocean Spray Insecticide stains 5% D. D. T." was not
registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An
examination of the product showed that the laei borne bhr the containers of


I B







INSECTICIDE,


MFUGICIDE,


A"l'RODENTICIDE


ACT [N. J., I.;p'M


It was alleged that the product failed b comply with the act in that tbi
labels borne by the containers of the product did not bear a statement of net
weight or measure of the contents.
It was further alleged that the product wat misbranded in that the labels borne
by the containers of the product did not bear an ingredient statement giving
the correct name and percentage by weightofer each of the active ingredients or
an ingredient statement giving the correct names of each of the active ingredients
in the descending order of the percentage of each present.
On November 10, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
20. Lack of registration and misbranding of "Shoo Spray." 1. S. w. 2 ifty-$ve-
gallon drums, more or less, of "Shoo Spray." Default decree of condemsma-
tion, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. P. & R. No. 31. I. D. No. 17479.)


The product "Shoo Spr


Fungicide, and Rodent
contain directions for
for the protection of
product did not bear
On August 4, 1949,
acting upon a report b
libel, praying seizure


drums, more or
the product was
or about October
nation of the act.
It was allege
Agriculture aswr


ay w


icide Act.
use which
the public
an ingrec
the Unite
y the Secr
for cond


!s nc
The
h are
c, and
Lent
Ud Sta
etary
emna


it registered under the Federal Insecticide,
Labeling accompanying the product did not
necessary and, if complied with, adequate
I the labels borne by the containers of the
statement as required by the act.
tes Attorney for the District of Columbia,
of Agriculture, filed in the District Court a
tion and confiscation of 2 fifty-five-gallon


less, of "Shoo Spray," at Washington, D. C., and alleging that
an economic poison which had been transported interstate on
S1, 1948, by The Mortemoth Co., from Milwaukee, Wis., in vio-


I that
quired


the product was not
by section 4 of the act.


registered


with


the Secretary


It was alleged that the product was misbranded in that the labels borne by
the product 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 thd
inert ingredients.
It was alleged that the product was further misbranded in that the labeling
accompanying the product did not contain directions for use which are necessary
and, if complied with, adequate for the protection of the public.
. On October 26, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be delivered
tthe District of Columbia Jail for its use.
1
21. Lack of registration of "Kemeo Insaectldde Powder-Contafine 10% D. D. T
Powder." UT. S. v. 95 eight-ounce cartons, more or leas, of "Kemeo Inseetl4
eide Powder-Contains 10% D. D. T. Powder." Default decree of condem-
nation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R. No. 32. I. D. No. 17925.)
The product "Kemco Insecticide Powder---Contains 10% D. DI). T. Powder" waf
not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
On July 19, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of
Indiana, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 95 eight-
ounce cartons, more or less, of "Kemco Insecticide Powder-Contains 10% D. D.
T. Powder," at Hammond, Ind., and alleging that the product was an economic
poison which had been transported interstate on or about March 31, 1949, by th


.- a-..- ~. .. **t .5- '-U- S


nrn r 'n Pnnln


II I In nl n r n nm 1 nn I uwnnrr


i--


Fb






1-25]


NOTICES rOFWM U


On August 4, 1949, the Uni
Illinois, acting upon a report b
SCourt a libel, praying seizur
bottles, more or less, of "Pix
Ill., and alleging that the pi
transported interstate on or a
From Columbus, Ohio, in violati
It was alleged that the pr
Agriculture as required by sect
It was alleged that the pro
the containers of the product
name and percentage of each


ted S
y the
e for
:ite C
roduct


states Attorney for the
Secretary of Agricultur
; wasation an o e
wondh anec Littc bo
rwas an economic oi


bout Aptvl, 1949, by thiC
on of th ad


oduc.t
ion 4
duct
did
of tl


percentage of the inert ingredients,
of each of the active and each of t
of the percentage of each present i


Southern District of
e, filed In p pistriot
S4seation ot n pipt
'1, at B1lo~ington,
Son which had ben
olinibus Vaccine Co.,


was cot r~glaterm w ith the Secretary of
of the et.
was misbranded In that the labels bhorne by
iot Par Iat ingrfiE t statement giving the
e active ingredients, together with the total
or an ingredient statement giving the names
he inert ingredients in the Jescending order
a each classification, together with the total


percentage of the inert ingredients.
On December 6, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.

28. Lack of registration and misbranding of Lantu Rodenticide." U. S. v. 2
fivwe-pound packages, 36 three-oun packages, 30 six-ounce packages, and
68 eight-ounce packages, more or les, of "Lantu Rodenticede." Consent
decree of condemnation and release under bond. (I, P. & Rt. No. 40. I. D.
No. 18968.)
The product "Lantu Rodenticide" Ws not registered under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and an examination of the product


showed that the labels on


statement as
On August
setts, acting
Court a libel
packages, 36C


Required by
16, 1949, th
upon a repo
, praying sei
three-ounce


packages, more or
that the product w
on or about May
Laconia, N. H., in
It was alleged
Agriculture as req
S t was alleged tl


less, (
7as an
23, 19
violate
that t
uired t


the containers of the product did not bear an ingredient
the act.
e United Stals Attorney for the District of Massachu-
irt by the Se tary of Agriculture, filed in the District
izure for con B nation and confiscation of 2 five-pound
Packages, siounce packages, and 68 eight-ounce
)f "Lantu Edenticide," at Boston, Mass., and alleging
economic polion which had been transported interstate
49, and June 5, 1949, by Laeonia Laboratories, from
on of the act
he product was not registered with the Secretary of
)y section 4 of the act.


it the product was:misbranded in that the labels borne by the


containers of the product did not bear an ingredient statement giving the name
and percentage of each of the active ingredients, together with the total per-
centage l of the inert ingredients, or 24 ingredient statement giving the name of
cb of the active and each of the inert ingredients in the descending order of
the percentage of each present in each classifteation, together with the total
percentage of the inert ingredients.
SLaboratofes, of Laceonia, N. H., claimed ownership of the product,
requested its release under cash bond for the purpose of bringing the product
-eojmtisnce with the act, and consented to the entry of a condemnation
decree. On December 6, 1949, a decree of condemnation was entered, and it was
ordered that the condemned product e released to the claimant under such bond.
24. Lack of registration and misbraipng of "PinMe at Lime Deedorizer, Disi-
etant iad 1MM Gennielde." tl S. v. 385 one-pound packages, more or
less, of "Pineated Lime Deodorzer, fIsieaictant and Mld Germicide."
Default decree of condemnation5 forfeiture, and destruction. (I. F. & R.


1;; ot*itA~g,,, 6


it ~~fi, )


Ja.,







INSECTICIDE,


FUIGIN~CIDE,


ANK:i RODENTICIDE


ACT


It was alleged that the product was misb ded in that I
tainers of the product did not bear an in nt statement
percentage of each of the active ingredients together with
of the inert ingredients, or an ingredient staement giving
the active and each of the inert ingredientsgin the descend
centage of each present in each classficeatio; together with
of the inert ingredients.
On November 21, 1949, no claimant having.ppeared, a dei
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ord d that the prq
St. Joseph's Hospital, Bangor, Maine, for its use.


the labels of t
giving the na
the total per
the name .of
ing order oft
the total Der


cree of conden
oduct be deHivY


25. Lack of regiltratlon of "MPG No. 2 D. dI T. Potato DUSt." U. 8. v. 3004
pound bags, more or less, of "MPG Nit. 2 D. D. T. Potato Duast." O
decree of condemnation and release whder bond. (I. F. & R. No. 48 .
No. 18971.) ..
The product "MPG No. 2 D. D. T. Potato bust" was not registered undoei
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On August 26, 1949, the United States Attorney for the District of New
shire, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the D
Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of .O9
pound bags, more or less, of "MPG No. 2 D. D. T. Potato Dust," at Concord .
and alleging that the product was an economic poison which had been trani
interstate on or about August 9, 1949, by Maine Potato Growers, In.ti*
Presque Isle, Maine, in violation of the act. ."
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary o
culture as required by section 4 of the act. "::
Merrimack Farmers' Exchange, Inc., of Concord, N. H., claimed ow|
the product and requested its release under bond pursuant to the ae
sented to the entry of a condemnation decree. On October 28, 1949, a
condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the condemned
released to the claimant under such bond for the purpose of bringing t
into compliance with the act. .


INDEX TO


NOTICES OF


JUDGMENT 1-25


N. J. No.
Abesto Chemical Termite Control :
Abesto Manufacturing Corp. 13
Blitz Brand Contains 5% D. D. T. :
Ocean Coffee Co--------- 18
Cooke Bug.-Shot 5% Chlordane Dust-


ing Powder:
Cooke Laboratory
Cooke's Bug-Shot 40%
Emulsifiable:
Cooke Laboratory
Cooke's Tested Poultry
X-10:
Cooke Laboratory
Crude Naphthalene Flakes:
Kaufmann Se'd (
Gas Rodent Destroyer:


Products-
Chlordane
Products-
Formulae
Products_


.-0r


Corn Belt Chemical Co-_
Getz Theraseptic:
The William Getz Corp__-
Howco Brand Rat and Mouse Em-
balmer :
Johnson Tire Supply Co---
Hylite Wall Paint: .
.Carbola Chemical Co., Inc- _


Makon's Arbortox "64": .-.
Makon Chemicals, Ince.
MPG No. 2 D. D. T. Potato Dust: .!
Maine Potato Growers, Ino ;|
Merrimack Farmers'. -;:
cha nge, Inc .... ...l:
Ocean Spray Insecticide Con- .I
tains 5% D. D. T.: '
Ocean Coffee Co.__...._.-- .
Pilgrim Odo-Wick: ..;|
Pilgrim Odo Wick Cb.....-...'
Pineated Lime Deodorizer DifinfetJeet !
ant and Mild Germicide: .'l
Pineated Products Corp_., .|
Pixite Concentrated Litter Spray: i
Columbus Vaccine Co.--.- .:.
Quick Action Lice Spray: :
Cooke Laboratory Products..
Rodent .Control : .-: |
R Special Effects Maniufaetu- -
ing Co---------..
Shoo Spray: Mto
The Mortemoth Co...... ..:.:


m