Notices of judgment under the insecticide act

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Notices of judgment under the insecticide act
Physical Description:
v. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Insecticide and Fungicide Board
United States -- Food, Drug, and Insecticide Administration
United States -- Food and Drug Administration
United States -- Agricultural Marketing Service
United States -- Agricultural Marketing Administration
United States -- War Food Administration. -- Office of Distribution
United States -- Office of Marketing and Services
United States -- Dept. of Agriculture. -- Production and Marketing Administration
Publisher:
U.S. G.P.O.
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:
Frequency:
irregular
completely irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Insecticides -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre:
serial   ( sobekcm )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )

Notes

Dates or Sequential Designation:
Began with no. 73.
Dates or Sequential Designation:
-2041/2066 (Jan. 1951).
Numbering Peculiarities:
Some nos. issued together.
Issuing Body:
Issued by: no. 73-1100, U.S. Insecticide and Fungicide Board; no. 1101/1125-1166/1175, Food, Drug and Insecticide Administration; 1176/1190-1731/1745, Food and Drug Administration; 1746/1762-1790/1800, Agricultural Marketing Service; 1801/1811-1812/1825, Agricultural Marketing Administration; 1826/1840-1885, Food Distribution Administration; 1886/1895-1896/1910, War Food Administration, Office of Distribution; 1911/1925, War Food Administration, Office of Marketing Services; 1926/1949-2041/2066, Production and Marketing Administration.
General Note:
Description based on: 1101/1125 (Dec. 1928); 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 - 004700296
oclc - 13957905
lccn - sn 86034178
Classification:
ddc - 632.951 U61
System ID:
AA00008549:00050

Related Items

Preceded by:
Notice of insecticide act judgment

Full Text
:* /


TI


FEE


z::


'95)


N. I., I. .041-2066
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT


Issued January 1951


OF


AGRICULTURE


Production and


Marketing


Administration


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


UNDER
2041-2066


THE


INSECTICIDE ACT


The.notices of judgment herewith relate to cases
District Courts and are approved for publication,
t I~naticide Act of 19t10 (7 U. S. C. 121-134).
RAL:
:Production anJ
W ASH GTON, DI. C., November 7,1950.


arising in the United States
as provided in section 4 of
PH S. TRIGG,
Administrator,
Marketing Administration.


2i0. Wisbranding and adulteration of "Wonder Bleach." U. S. v. 228 quart containers, more
Soxr less, of "Wonder Bleach." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruc-
tion. (I. & F. No. 2473. I. D. No. 15486.)
Examination of "Wonder Bleach" showed that the product was a sodium
~pbc lorte solution and contained 4.23 percent of sodium iypochlorite.
On Wugust 4, 1947, the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey,
actjfl on a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
a W taying seizure and condemnation of 228 quart contailhrs, more or
less, of~ Wtider Bleach" at Trenton, N. J., alleging that the product had been
shipped is state commerce, on or about April 27, 1947, by the Wonder
Chemical Cornmny, from Philadelphia, Pa., and charging that the product
was a mnisbranded and adulterated fungicide within the meaning of the In-
ectficide Act of 1910.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded in that the statements,
(1) "Active Ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite 5%, Inert Ingredients 95%" and
(2) "Wonder Bleach For Washing Clothes, Cleaning Sinks, Toilets,
Tije Floors & General Disinfecting For Cleansing Sinks. Place a
ssatupside down over the sink drain and fill with about 1 inch of water. Put
1t I tup of Wonder Bleach and mix well. Allow to stand for 2 hours or over
eight. Etuit and vegetable stains will disappear and the sink should look as
god0 at new. For Cleaning Bathtubs. Use 2 cups of Wonder Bleach to hflf
the tub of water. Allow to stand over night. For Cleaning Toilet Bowls.
Add a cup of Wonder Bleach and allow to stand over night. For Cleaning Tile
Floors. Add a cup of Wonder Bleach to a pail of warm water and wash tile.
For Washing Dishes. A few spoonfuls added to the dishwater will keep the
dishes bright and clean. Fill garbage pail with water and add a cup of Wonder
Bleach. Stir and allow to stand for an hour. Sprinkle Winder Bleach in the
outhouse as often as necessary to overcome bad odors," borne on the labels
IFixed to the containers of the product, were false and misleading as the product
contained less than 5 percent sodium hypochlorite and more than 9^ percent
nacm' i-iuoarn lanl-o ati nrn l nr-'d Tn-I- 1h, ,' a1-v1 a^n -n Al n'nn- in 'r vP i-ih a'-inln4c anfl







694


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I. F.


2042. Adulteration and misbranding of "Lee Chem Sure-Kill Insect
quart cans and 387 gallon cans, more or less, of "Lee Chem
Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (
No. 13119, 15679, and 15680.)
An examination of "Lee Chem Sure-Kill Insect Paint" sho'
less than 5 percent dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane (DDf
percent inert ingredients.


On
actin
a libel
more
that
June


anywhere those insects thrive. Long
Screen Paint when applied as directed destroys
roaches, silverfish, ants, gnats, and many other
residual deposit from one treatment to screens wil


several months.


with a
opening
mixed
Brush
mesh.
quanti
cator i
a circi
around


brush.


* Directions


Remove


Be sure frames are clean and d


g and stir thoroughly from the 1
ready for use. Thin with a n
application: Apply in thin coats
Paint Spreader Technique: Wl
ty of the SURE KILL SCREEN
n the paint and apply to the score


1
I


lar motion


working


upward from


the edge of the screen,"


gallon cans in which the pro
borne on the gallon cans in
leading as the product cont
roethane (DDT) and more
directed it was not an effec
insects referred to, and the


duct
whi
aine
than
tive
net


)ottom of
minimum
3, brushing
hen using


'AINT i
Sby bru
the bo


borne on


Al
ry
ca


Paint." U. S. v. 1,701
Sure-Kill Insect Paint."
I. & F. No. 2484. I. IX.


wed that it contained
r) and more than 95


October 21, 1947, the United States Attorney for the District of Maryland,
g upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
l praying seizure and condemnation of 1,701 quart cans and 387 gallon cans,
or less, of "Lee Chem Sure-Kill Insect Paint" at Baltimore, Md., alleging
the product had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about June 15,
27, and July 5, 1946, by the Farm & Home Products Company, from Wash-
_- .. a* -


Lasting Sure-Kill
by contact, flies, mosquitoes,
Objectionable insects. The
1 retain its killing ability for
1 Dust and dirt from screen
. Shake the can well before
n. Sure Kill Screen Paint is


if necessary.
ot to clog the


pour a
r. Dip
the wir
a final


o the qua
"One U. S


small
appli-
e with
sweep
rt and
. Gal."


re false and mis-


t


Swas packed, and the statement
ch the product was packed, we


I(
1


United States gallon.
On December 10, 1947, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
demnation and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the product be
destroyed.


ington, D. C., and charging that the product was an adulterated ano misDranaea
insecticide within the meaning of the Insecticide Act of 1910.
It was alleged that the product was adulterated in that its strength or purity
fell below the professed standard or quality under which it was sold as the
labels affixed to the cans containing the product stated, in part, "Contains 5%
DDT ACTIVE INGREDIENTS Dichloro-diphenyl trichloroethane
(DDT) 5%, INERT INGREDIENTS 95%," whereas the product contained less
than 5 percent dichloro-diphenyl trichloroethane (DDT) and more than 95
percent inert ingredients.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded in that the statements, (1)
"Contains 5% DDT ACTIVE INGREDIENTS Dichloro-diphenyl tri-
chloroethane (DDT) 5% INERT INGREDIENTS 95%," and (2) "Lee Chem
Sure-Kill Insect Paint Destroys Flies, Mosquitoes, Roaches, Silver Fish, Ants,
Gnats, And Many Other Insects Insect Killer Screen Paint A clean,
effective and economical preparation containing DDT for screens in homes,
farm buildings, stores, restaurants, food packing houses, industrial buildings,


amount of water
g out well so as n
roller applicator
n a tray or sauce
shing lightly over
)ttom, finish with


the labels affixed


d less than 5 percent dichloro-diphenyl trichlo-
95 percent inert ingredients and when used as
insect-killing screen paint, it would not kill the
content of the 1-gallon cans was less than one


1







2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


695


It was alleged that the product was misbranded in that the statements,


O-FONE Filter Set full year's protection helps
* don't catch cold by phone," and "A PUR-O-FONE
give you the protection you need. Each disk that fits into th
on your phone is impregnated with a powerful germ killer,


germs that con
from using you
the one that ha
indefinitely. *
germicide used
bacteria. It in


tact your disposable filters. Moreov
r disposable filters lasts a long time.
s impregnated your disposable filters
* PROOF OF PUR-O-FONE'S


in your PUR-O-FONE
hibits the spread of c


transmission of diphtheria, scarlet feve
eases of the upper respiratory tract.
THE MANY ORGANISMS DESTROY
YOUR PUR-O-FONE SET. Organisms


er, the p
Unlike
retains i
Protectiv


"PUR-


prevent infection
Filter Set helps
e holder you snap
which kills most
protection you get
many germicides,
.ts potency almost


e


Power


. The


set is effective against most pathogenic
ommunicable diseases and reduces the
r, mastitis and many communicable dis-
THE FOLLOWING ARE A FEW OF
ED BY THE GERMICIDE USED IN
Salmonella paratyphi B, Staphylococ-


cus aureus, Streptococcus hemolyticus, Streptococcus viridans, Corynebacterium
diphtheriae, Cryptococcus hominis, Diplococcus pneumoniae, Type 111, Monillia
albicans CHARACTERISTICS: The germicide used on PUR-0-FONE Filter
Sets is virtually odorless, colorless, non-toxic, stable and neutral. It is non-
irritating to skin in the concentrations used on our PUR-O-FONE Filter Sets


and provides safe, rapid destroying action of extreme potency.
tect yourself-your family-your fellow workers. Cut down on
away from the job. Get rid of unpleasant mouthpiece odors,
the mouthpiece even touches your lips. Make sure it's clean


borne on the
inside the con
kill all germs


labels affixed to


itainers, were
or act as a g


falE
erm.


the containers of the product an
se and misleading in that the pro
icide for germs expelled from the


Pro-
the time spent
too. At times
nd antiseptic,"
d the circulars
duct would not
mouth of indi-


viduals using the phone, would not kill the specific bacteria and fungi listed
when used as directed, and could not be depended on to prevent the transmission
of disease or protect individuals from such diseases as are transmitted by con-
taminated telephone sets or the specific diseases listed, and the germicide used
on the "PUR-O-FONE" sets is not nontoxic.
It was alleged that the product was further misbranded in that the product
consisted principally of an inert substance (cardboard), which would not pre-
vent, destroy, repel, or mitigate fungi (bacteria), and the name and percentage
amount of such inert ingredient were not stated on the label, nor did the label
bear a statement of the name and percentage amount of each ingredient having
fungicidal (bactericidal) properties and the total percentage of inert ingredients.
On February 2, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
demnation and forfeiture was entered, and the court ordered that the product,
the boxes containing it, and the circulars inside the boxes, be destroyed.


2044. Adulteration and misbranding of "The Amazing Benny
pint bottles and 95 quart bottles, more or less, of
Spray." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture,
2492. I. D. No. 16852.)
An examination of "The Amazing Benny Hex In
contained less than 5.4 percent benzene hexachloride
and less than 0.6 percent pyrethrins.
On November 26, 1948, the United States Attorney
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agricultur
a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 190 pint


more or 1
ing that


Hex Insect Spray." U. S. v. 190
'The Amazing Benny Hex Insect
and destruction. (I. & F. No.

[sect Spray" showed that it
(10 percent gamma isomer)

for the District of Arizona,
e, filed in the District Court
bottles and 95 quart bottles,


.ess, of "The Amazing Benny Hex Insect Spray" at Phoenix, Ariz., alleg-
the product had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about








696


INSECTICIDE


ACT


LN. J., 1. F.


pyrethrins) 3.0%; Petroleum Hydrocarbons 91.2'
THE AMAZING Benny Hex Insect Spray *
Flies, Mosquitoes, Gnats, Roaches, Ants, Fleas,


5; Perfume .4%" and "* *
S* RESIDUAL SPRAY For
Clothes Moths, Carpet Beetles


and certain other insects. DIRECTIONS ROACHES Spray cracks
and crevices in woodwork, dark places behind pipes, under refrigerators and all
places which roaches infest, hitting as many insects as possible. A thorough
treatment may give protection for several weeks. BEDBUGS Thoroughly spray
joints of bedsteads, springs, seams and buttons of mattresses, paying particular
attention to cracks around baseboards, floors and wall paper. ANTS Spray
solution to hit as many ants as possible and thoroughly wet runways and other
places which they frequent. CLOTHES MOTHS AND CARPET BEETLES
Thoroughly spray clothes closets and articles to be protected, paying particular
attention to folds and seams, as well as spraying the containers in which they
are packed. If containers are not airtight repeat at monthly intervals. Respray
after dry cleaning. FLIES, MOSQUITOES AND GNATS For best results close
all doors and windows and spray the product through all parts of the room,


parti
room


culai
shoi


rly towards the
uLild be closed for


screens by applying


ceiling so as to fill the room with
Sten or fifteen minutes after spraying


g liquid wit


be treated at frequent interva
other flea infested places. Oi


labels
produce
isomer
produce
specific
,On .
demna
destroy:


affixed to the containers
't contained less than 5.4
) and less than 0.6 per
t would not provide resi


ed.
[anu
tion
ved.


Sa brush.
ls. FLEAS
ne spraying
of the prod
percent ben
cent pyreth
dual spray


fine mist. The
Treat window


Screens subject to weathering
Thoroughly spray floors, ru
lasts several weeks," borne
uct, were false and misleading
zene hexachloride (10 percent
rings, and when used as direct
for several weeks against the


should
gs and
on the
as the
gamma
ted the
insects


ary 21, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the product be


2045. Adulteration and misbranding of "Ford Brand Benny Hex
"Ford Brand Benny Hex Insect Spray." U.


or less, of "Ford Brand Benny Hex *
more or less, of "Ford Brand Benny Hex
of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction
and 16632.)


An examination


that it contained
and an examinati
that this product
cent gamma isom
On October 29
of Florida, actin


* Concentrate" and
v. 34 quart bottles, more


* Concentrate" and 1,196 pint bottles,
* Insect Spray." Default decree
. (I. & F. No. 2493. I. D. Nos. 16631


n of "Ford Brand Benny Hex Concentrate" showed
less than 5.6 percent benzene hexachloride (gamma isomer) ;
on of "Ford Brand Benny Hex Insect Spray" showed
contained less than 5.4 percent benzene hexachloride (10 per-
er) and less than 0.8 percent pyrethrins.
, 1948, the United States Attorney for the Southern District


g upon


District Court a libel pra


a report
ying seizu


or less, of "Ford Brand Benny Hex
bottles, more or less, of "Ford Brand
St. Petersburg, Fla., alleging that the
commerce, on or about October 29. 1946


cide


Corporation,


branded
It wa
its strei
it was
in part


charging


I insecticides within the
s alleged that the product
agth or purity fell below
sold as the labels affixed
, "* Methyleted


by the Secretary
re and condemnat


* C
Benny Hex
products hac


of Agriculture, filed in the
ion of 34 quart bottles, more
concentrate" and 1,196 pint
* Insect Spray" at


1 been sl


, from Detroit, Mich.,


that the products were
meaning of the Insectic
in the quart containers
the professed standard 4
to the quart containers
Naphthalenes 42%, Hy


ad
ide
wvas
or q
of
dro


lipped in interstate
by the Ford Insecti-
lulterated and mis-
Act of 1910.
adulterated in that
quality under which
the product stated,
carbon Oils 52.4%.


1


!


J







2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


697


silver fish, bedbugs, wasps, crickets and ants. The residual deposit from one
treatment to interior surfaces sheltered from the weather and sun will retain


its killing abilities two to" three months.
doorways, etc., the residual properties wil]
weeks or longer. DIRECTIONS
fex Concentrate to four quarts of water


* Apply the diluted mixture as a
strap pump-up sprayer, knapsack, bucket,
is preferable not to use an atomizing spra;
Do not apply so heavily that the liquid run
one quart of diluted solution to each 250 s
to cover entire area being treated. *
the quart containers of the product, were


When applied outdoors, on screens,
I ordinarily be retained two to three
Add one quart of Ford Brand Benny
to make a 5% residual type spray.
fairly coarse spray from a shoulder
wheelbarrow, or power sprayer. It


yer. It can also be ap)
s on the wall. For bes
quaree feet of surface.
*," borne on the la
false and misleading


p
Lt

ib
as


when used as directed, was not an effective residual insecticide a;
sects named, was not the most effective product ever found for t
many pests inhabiting farms, industrial and commercial buildings,
safe to use in dairies and all stables and cattle pens.
It was alleged that the product in the pint containers was adult
its strength or purity fell below the professed standard or quality
it was sold as the statements, "** Benzene Hexachloride (
Isomer) 5.4%, Pyrethrum extr. (20% pyrethrins) 3.0%, Petroleu
bons 91.2%, Perfume .4%, Active Ingredients 100.0% *,"
labels affixed to the pint containers of the product represented tha
contained not less than 5.4 percent benzene hexachloride (10 pe
isomer) and not less than 0.6 percent pyrethrins, whereas the
tained less than 5.4 percent benzene hexachloride (10 percent ga
and less than 0.6 percent pyrethrins.
It was alleged that the product in the pint containers was m
that the statements. "FORD BRAND BENNY HEX *


SPRAY RESIDUAL SPRAY For Flies, Mosquit
Ants, Fleas, Clothes Moths, Carpet Beetles and certain oti
DIRECTIONS ROACHES Spray cracks and crevices
places behind pipes, under refrigerators and all places w
hitting as many insects as possible. A thorough treatment
for several weeks. BEDBUGS Thoroughly spray joints o
seams and buttons of mattresses, paying particular attenti
baseboards, floors and wall paper. ANTS Spray solution
as possible and thoroughly wet runways and other places
CLOTHES MOTHS AND CARPET BEETLES Thorou
closets and articles to be protected, paying particular att
seams, as well as spraying the containers in which they
trainers are not air-tight repeat at monthly intervals. Rest


'I


ing. FLIES, MOSQUITOES AND GNATS
windows and spray the product through
towards the ceiling so as to fill the room
be closed for ten or fifteen minutes after
applying liquid with a brush. Screens sul
at frequent intervals. FLEAS Thorough


lied by brush.
results apply
Make certain
els affixed to
the product,
against the in-
he control of
and was not


rated in that
under which
10% Gamma
im Hydrocar-
borne on the
t the product
recent gamma
product con-
mma isomer)

misbranded in
INSECT


oes, Gnats, Roaches,
her insects. *
in woodwork, dark


which
may
f bed
on to
to hi
which
highly
;entio
are p
)ray a


For best results close
all parts of the rooi
with a fine mist. Tl


spraying. Treat win


roaches infest,
give protection
steads, springs,
cracks around
t as many ants
they frequent.
spray .clothes
n to folds and
acked. If con-
after dry clean-
e all doors and
m, particularly
he room should
low screens bv


)ject to weathering should be treated
fly spray floors, rugs and other flea


infested places. One spraying lasts several weeks," borne on the labels affi
to the pint containers of the product, were false and misleading as the prodi
when used as directed, would not provide residual value for several we
against the insects specified.
On January 24. 1949. no claimant having anneared. a default decree of c


sed
ict,
eks

on-








698


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I. F.


alleging that the product had been shipped in interstate
August 15, 1946, by the Hoggatt Chemical Company, from
charging that the product was a misbranded insecticide
the Insecticide Act of 1910.
It was alleged that the product in the quart and pint cont
in that the following statements, borne on the labels on
product or contained in circulars enclosed in such cont
misleading: (Bottle Label) (1) "Active Ingredients:
calcium, copper and ferric sulphates, water of crystallizat
insoluble silica, phosphoric acid, quassia, sulphonated a:
gatt's Moth Spra Liquid Moth Proofs Everything Guara
One application is all that is necessary, as Moth Spra is


dry cleaning, sunlight (
quickly absorbed by the
woolens. Moth Spra i
proofing compared with
to treat wool fiber che:
worms, carpet beetles,
food value and no long
for the wool, and the


Moth Spra
is general
moistened
spray and
with heavy


an be apple
preferred.


commerce, on or about
Kansas City, Mo., and
within the meaning of

miners was misbranded
Sthe containers of the
ainers, were false and
Aluminum, potassium,
ion, uncombined water,


alcohol and (
nteed 5 years
unaffected by


"Hog-
* *


washing,


r age. Wool has a strong affinity for Moth Spra; it is
wool and as quickly dries. Moth Spra is safe for babies'
s effective because it is a revolutionary idea in moth-
all other mothproofers. Moth Spra is a liquid developed
mically to make it uneatable and unpalatable to moth
and related insects; therefore, when wool has lost its
er serves as nourishment, the insect has no further use
wool has become mothproofed. Directions:
ied with sponge or by dipping the article, but spraying
Every part of article treated must be thoroughly


for complete protection. Rugs and Carpets
allow to dry before using. Clothing, Blanke
spray, holding about six inches from article,


I


as well as across so as to be sure to cover all parts.
Hang on line or suitable place so that operator can spi
of fabric, and allow to dry before moving. Upholstern
inaccessible places and spray or sponge thoroughly, usi
nap." (White Circular-"Facts About Moth Spra Liqi
Spra Liquid Moth Proofs Everything Guaranteed 5
Carpets Clothing, Blankets and Upholstered Articles
that is necessary, as Moth Spra is unaffected by washing
or age. Facts About Moth Spra Liquid Moth Spra is
* Moth Spra is effective as it is a revolutionary i
compared with all other mothproofers, as Moth Spra is


treat the wood fibre


chemically


: Treat with a strong
ts, Drapes, Etc.: Treat
spraying up and down
Suits and Overcoats:
ray or sponge all parts
ed Articles: Reach all
ng whisk broom to lay
lid") "Hoggatt's Moth


Year
One
,dry
*
dea i
a pr4


s For Rugs and
application is all
cleaning, sunlight
* Dependable.
in mothproofing as
ocess developed to


so as to make it uneatable and unpalatable to


the Moth Worm, Carpet Beetles and related insects, therefore when the wool
has lost its food value and no longer serves as nourishment to the Moth Worm,
the insect has no further use for the wool and the wool has become moth-proofed.
This processing does not change the physical properties of the wool. It remains


just as soft,
of moths or
or as far as
with Moth
bringing art
and observi
length of tin


light and warm as before treatment, yet it is proof against attack
beetles. Moth-proofing with Moth Spra endures; it lasts for years,
we know for the life of the article treated; goods that were treated
Spra five years ago are moth-proofed today. This is proven by
idles treated with Moth Spra in direct contact with live Moth Worms
ng that the material remains unattacked and unharmed for any


ie.


Moth Spra has been used for years by Cleaners and Professional


Exterminators,


by Moths
has been
of satisfied
,.-<* flffr AQI c


or (
used
d cus
i- -.


who guarantee its effectiveness


carpet Beetles for a period
in the finest homes and bui
tomers that can speak for its
* t< &- J-n 4a S. aw -^ a^ t4b n ,1


against damage or reinfestation


of five years
siness places
effectiveness.
*t-L- nt- ..-k ktv- 21nfi to-*


or longer. Moth Spra
and we have thousands
Remember the process
a 4-lt -4. E4 rc ,1 2-l1


Au







2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


699


in that they represented that said product contained various active ingredients
and that said product, when used as directed, was a mothproofer, would make
wool uneatable and unpalatable to the fabric pests named, and would mothproof
susceptible fabrics for a 5-year period, whereas the product consisted entirely
of inert ingredients, and it was not a mothproofer, would not make wool uneatable
and unpalatable to the fabric pests named, and would not mothproof susceptible
fabrics for a 5-year period. It was further alleged that the product was mis-
branded in that it consisted entirely of inert ingredients and the label did not
bear a statement of the name and percentage amount of each of such ingredients
and the fact that they were inert.
On June 28, 1949, a default decree of condemnation and forfeiture was entered
and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
2047. Misbranding of "Hill's Germorene"; misbranding and adulteration of "Hill's Hy-Pine
Disinfectant." U. S. v. Arthur I. Hillman and Ralph Hillman, individuals, doing busi-
ness as copartners under the name of Hill Manufacturing Company. Plea of nolo
contender to counts one, two, and three. Fine of $350. (I. & F. No. 2475. I. D. Nos.
15217 and 15277.)
An examination of "Hill's Germorene" showed that this product contained
about 1.4 percent of soap and a small percentage of perfume and formaldehyde,
and over 96 percent of an inert ingredient, water. The product was found to be
ineffective as a disinfectant or germicide. The label of the product did not con-
tain an ingredient statement.
An examination of "Hill's Hy-Pine Disinfectant" showed that it contained 18.4
percent of water.
The United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, acting upon a
report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court an information,
in four counts, against Arthur I. Hillman and Ralph Hillman, individuals, doing
business as copartners under the name of Hill Manufacturing Company, alleging
introduction into interstate commerce of two fungicides known as "Hill's Ger-
morene" and "Hill's Hy-Pine Disinfectant" which were shipped from Atlanta,


Ga., on or a
Florence, S.
and/or adul
In count
morene," th


bout
C.,
tera
one,
e pr(


of an inert sul
fungi bacteriai
state the nam
state the nan
(bactericidal)
In count tw


to be f
product
odorant
Pleasan
such as
animal


stroy


further


b


SDecember 12 and December 18, 1946,
respectively, and charging that the
ted fungicides within the meaning of I
Relating to the December 12, 1946,
)duct was alleged to be misbranded in
stance (water) which did not prevent,


to Mount Dora, Fla., and
products were misbranded
the Insecticide Act of 1910.
shipment of "Hill's Ger-
that it consisted partially
destroy, repel, or mitigate


a), and the labels affixed to the containers of the product did not
e and percentage amount of such inert ingredient nor did the labels
ie and percentage amount of each ingredient having fungicidal
properties and the total percentage of inert ingredients.
o, relating to the same shipment, "Hill's Germhorene" was alleged
misbranded in that the labels affixed to the containers of the


stated: "Hill's Germorene An Effective Germi
Deodorizes And Disinfects In One
t And Refreshing Odor-Germorene not only
particularly offensive public toilets, urinals,
and body odors, but is also a most effective g


cide Disinfectant a
Operation Leaves
destroys malignant
garbage cans, fish


nd De-
a Very
; odors
smells,


ermicide. Germorene de-


bacteria and will be found to be a valuable aid in the control and prevention


of the spread of many infectious diseases. Germorene will be found very effec-
tive for use in Kitchens, Hospitals, Jails, Public Conveyances, Theatres, Toilets,
Schools, etc. In spraying Germorene for disinfecting purposes, use
full strength and make certain that all surfaces are wet with the spray," which
statements were false and misleading in that the product was not a disinfectant
a* ~- u..^ ,s* -3 .. -- .- 1 a /^- -' .4. 2 .- 1. -. -' -,^ -^--.i. -IZ i-.- .1 1 2-^ -.- -.- .4. -. 1 2..1 -.


>s







700


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I. F.


In count four, relating to the same shipment, "Hill's Hy-Pine Disinfectant"
was alleged to be misbranded in that the labels affixed to the containers of the
product stated: "Hy-Pine Disinfectant" and "contains not over 10% inert matter
(water)," which statements were false and misleading in that the statements
represented that the product was a pine oil disinfectant and contained not over
10 percent water, whereas the product was not a pine oil disinfectant but con-
sisted of a pine oil disinfectant and water and contained more than 10 percent


water.
On October 15


,1948, the defendants entered a plea of nolo contender to the first


three counts of the information, and on
fined $75 on count two and $50 each o
$350. Count four was dismissed.


October
n counts


22, 1948,
one and


each
three,


defendant was
or a total of


2048. Adulteration and
Company, Inc.


misbranding of
Plea of guilty.


"Klix Insecticide with DDT." U. S. v. Acme Sales
Fine of $50. (I. & F. No. 2495. I. D. No. 16602.)


An examination of "Klix Insecticide with DDT" showed that it contained 3.5
percent DDT (dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane) instead of 5 percent as claimed.
On January 19, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of
Florida, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis-
trict Court an information, in two counts, against Acme Sales Company, Inc., a
corporation, alleging shipment in interstate commerce, on or about November 7,
1947, from Jacksonville, Fla., to Brunswick, Ga., of quantities of a product known


as "Klix Insecticide with DDT"' which was an adulterated and
secticide within the meaning of the Insecticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength
low the professed standard or quality under which it was sold
fixed to the containers of the product stated: "Klix Insectici
* DD T 5% *," whereas the product did not co
DDT (dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane).


misbranded in-


or purity fell be-
as the labels af-


ie with D D T
ntain 5 percent


The product was alleged to be misbranded in that the labels affixed to the con-


tainers of the i
* *," which
stained less tha
On January
was fined $25 o


productt stated : "Klix Ins


ecticide with DDT DD T 5%


h statements were false and misleading in that the product con-
n 5 percent DDT (dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane).
24, 1949, the defendant corporation entered a plea of guilty and
n each of the two counts, or a total of $50.


2049. Adulteration and misbranding of "Twen's Bleach." U. S. v. 248 quarts, more or less, of
"fwen's Bleach." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. &
F. No. 2422. I. D. No. 13795.)


An examination of "Twen's Bleach" showed that it c(
2.83 percent sodium hypochlorite, the average deficiency
the amount claimed.
On August 27, 1946, the United States Attorney for t
Missouri, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agric


stained approximately
being 46.10 percent of


he Western District of
culture, filed in the Dis-


trict Court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 248 quarts, more or less,
of "Twen's Bleach" at Kansas City, Mo., alleging that the product had been
shipped in interstate commerce, on or about June 26, 1946, via truck by the Twen-
hofel Manufacturing Company, from Kansas City, Kans., and charging that the
product was an adulterated and misbranded fungicide within the meaning of the
Insecticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
below the standard or quality under which it was sold as the labels affixed to the
containers of the product stated : "Active Ingredient, Sodium Hypochlorite 5.25%
by weight, Inert Ingredients, 94.75% by weight," whereas the product contained
less than 5.25 percent of sodium hynochlorite by weight and more than 94.75


I
i







2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


701


would yield a solution containing 100 parts per million of available chlorine, or a
solution which could be relied on to disinfect, whereas, when used as directed,


1 ounce of the product in 4 gallons of water would not yield such
On December 2, 1946, no claimant having appeared, a decree of
and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the product be
2050. Adulteration and misbranding of "Old Nick's Seed Treatment." U. S.
trainers, more or less, of "Old Nick's Seed Treatment." Default decree
forfeiture, and destruction. (I. & F. No. 2470.. I. D. No. 15819.)
An examination of "Old Nick's Seed Treatment" showed that


a solution.
condemnation
destroyed.
v. 957 pint con-
of condemnation,

it was a coal


tar oil containing tar material, carbonlike material,
phenols.
On July 16, 1947, the United States Attorney for th
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, fil
a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 957 pint c
of "Old Nick's Seed Treatment" at Minneapolis, Minn., a
had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about A
Nick Seed Treatment Company, from Rockport, Mo.,
product was an adulterated and misbranded insectici
of the Insecticide Act of 1910.


The product was alleged to
below the professed standard
affixed to the containers of
Cresols 3.05%, hydrocarbonic
than 2%%," whereas the pro
The product was alleged t'


Ingredients,


Cresols


trials not more
protect corn fronr
attacks seed in
tions, One tables
box. Mix thoroi
affixed to the cot
statements repre
cresols, and that
from heart bugs,
whereas the prod
directed, would n
pests that attack
On November


3.05%


than
S*


Sbe adulterated in that its
or quality under which it
the product stated, in part
oils not more than 95%, in
duct contained less than 3.


o be misbranded in


, hydrocarbonic


," and '
heart-i


the ground. *
poonful to one t
ughly. Do not
ttainers of the p
sented that the


the product,
wireworms, a
uct contained
ot help protect
seed in the gr
12, 1947, no


mn
m


oils not


a small


amount


e District of Minnesota,
.ed in the District Court
ontainers, more or less,
alleging that the product
kpril 6, 1945, by the Old
and charging that the
de within the meaning


strength or purity fell
was sold as the labels
, "Active Ingredients,
ert materials not more
)5 percent cresols.


that the statements,


more


than


Old Nick's Seed Treatment
bugs, wire worms *
* Results guaranteed.
d one-half gallons of corn
ix and allow to dry," boi


product,


~1


whei
nd al
less


I
I


b


(


m
rne


"Active


45%, inert ma-
* Helps
r any pest that
* Direc-
ixed in planter
on the labels


were false and misleading in that the


'oduct contained
n used as directed
1 other pests that
than 3.05 percent


t corn from heart bugs
found.
claimant having ane


'-I


not less than 3.05
d, would help prot
attack seed in the
cresols, and, when
s, wireworms, and


tared,


a default


percent
ect corn
ground,
used as
ill other


decree


condemnation and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the product
be destroyed.


2051. Adulteration and misbranding of "Old Nick's Seed Treatment." U. S. v. Ivan James Nicker-
son, an individual, doing business under the name of Old Nick Seed Treatment Company.
Plea of guilty. Fine $100. (I. & F. No. 2446. I. D. Nos. 10877 and 10879.)
An examination of "Old Nick's Seed Treatment" showed that it was a coal
tar creosote containing tar material, carbonlike material, and a small amount
of phenols.
On March 10, 1947, the United States Attorney for the Western District of
Missouri, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the


District Court an information, in four
an individual, doing business under the
Treatment Company, alleging shipmen
.Tannnrv 15 1Q44 4Mnroh 21 1 44 nncd


counts, against Ivan James Nickerson,
style and trade name of Old Nick Seed
ts in interstate commerce, on or about
NTnvamhbr 17 1Q44 from Rnnlrnort- Mn


- -







702


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N.J., I..


Treatment *
worms *
guaranteed. *
mixed in planter
statements were
cent cresols and,
bugs, wireworms
On September


Helps protect corn from heart bi
or any pest that attacks seed in the ground. *
* One tablespoonful to one and one-half gallon
box. Mix thoroughly. Do not mix and allow to d
false and misleading since the product did not contain
When used as directed, did not help protect corn f
, and all other seed-attacking pests in the ground.
15, 1947, the defendant entered a plea of guilty and


igs, wire-
* Results
is of corn
ry," which
n 3.05 per-
rom heart

the court


imposed a fine of $25 on each of four counts, or a total of $100.
2052. Adulteration and misbranding of "High Up Laundry Bleach." U. S. v. 3,776 quart con-
tainers, more or less, of "High Up Laundry Bleach." Consent decree of condemnation
and release under bond. (I. & F. No. 2427. I. D. No. 14244.)
An examination of "High Up Laundry Bleach" showed that it contained an
average of 3.58 percent of sodium hypochlorite.
On September 12, 1946, the United States Attorney for the District of Kansas,
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 3,776 quart containers, more or less,
of "High Up Laundry Bleach" at Hutchinson, Kans., alleging that the product
had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about November 15, 1945, by the
Roisman Products Company, from Oklahoma City, Okla., and charging that the
product was an adulterated and misbranded fungicide within the meaning of the
Insecticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
below the standard or quality under which it was sold as the labels affixed
to the containers of the product stated, "Active Ingredients: Sodium Hypo-
chlorite 5.25% Inert Ingredients 94.75%," whereas the product contained less
than 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite and more than 94.75 percent inert
ingredients.
The product was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements, "Active
Ingredients: Sodium Hypochlorite 5.25% Inert Ingredients 94.75%," borne on
the labels affixed to the containers of the product, were false and misleading as
the product contained less than 5.25 percent of sodium hypochlorite and more
than 94.75 percent inert ingredients.
Guymon-Petro Mercantile Company claimed ownership of the product, re-
quested its release under bond pursuant to the act, and consented to the entry
of a condemnation decree. On March 10, 1947, a decree of condemnation was
entered and the product was released to the claimants under bond for the
purpose of bringing it into compliance with the act.
2053. Adulteration and misbranding of "Hilltop Wood Preserver D-K-NO-MOR Carbolineum"
and misbranding of "Hilltop Pine-O-5 Disinfectant." U. S. v. Fred H. Moore, doing
business under the name of Hilltop Laboratories. Plea of guilty. Fine $75. (I. & F.
No. 2464. I. D. Nos. 12815 and 12817.)
An examination of "Hilltop Wood Preserver D-K-NO-MOR Carbolineum"
showed that the product was a mixture consisting of about 50 percent creosote oil
and the remainder mineral oil, and the product was not a carbolineum or anthra-
cene oil carbolineum as claimed on the label.
An examination of "Hilltop Pine-O-5 Disinfectant" showed that this product
had a phenol coefficient of 0.78, instead of a phenol coefficient of 5 as claimed on
the label.
On September 19, 1947, the United States Attorney for the District of Minne-
sota, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court an information, in three counts, against Fred H. Moore, doing business
under the style and trade name of Hilltop Laboratories, alleging shipment in







4041-2096]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


703


bolineum"',and (2) "Hilltop D-K-NO-MOR Carbolineum Poiltry Mite
Repellent Repeos Poultry Mites Poultry House Uses Spray or paint
. for the control of CoQmnmon Pests. Ohiggers Clean the
houses, roosts, nests and floors by removing filth, dirt and manure. Burn the
litter. Thoroughly sweep the floor and walls. Take out all nests, roosts aid
fixtures which can be rgipoved. See that all equipment, cracks and crevices
are properly treated with D-K-NO-MOR. Once a year gives full protection,"
borne on the labels affixed to the jugs containing the product, were false and
misleading as the product was not anthracene oil or carbolineum and.would not
repel poultry mites and if .used as directed would not control chiggers.
The product "Hilltop Pine-O-5 Disinfectant" was alleged to be misbranded in
that the statements, "Hilltop Pine-O-5 Disinfectant Phenol Coefficient 5 F. D.
A*. F or general disinfection and for washing fountains, feeders and
other equipment, use one part Pine-0-5 to 100 parts water. In cold or damp
weather or when moisture is objectionable, use one part Pine-0-5 to 15 parts
kerosene or fuel oil. Pine-O-5 has 5 times the germ-killing power
of carbolic acid. Pine-O-5 kills common disease germs on contact.


Pine-0-5 can be used whenever a
can be mixed with either water o
for all uses," borne on the labels
were false and misleading as the s
phenol coefficient of not less than
dilution of one part to 100 parts
kerosene or fuel oil, had 5 times th
an ideal disinfectant for all uses,


L powerful disinfectant is wanted. Pine-0-5
ir kerosene-making it the ideal disinfectant
affixed to the bottles containing the product,
statements represented that the product had a
5, was an efficient disinfectant when used at
of water, would disinfect when diluted with
e germ-killing power of carbolic acid, and was
whereas the product did not have a phenol


coefficient of 5, was not an efficient disinfectant when used at a
part to 100 parts of water, would not disinfect when diluted with
oil, did not have 5 times the germ-killing power of carbolic acid,
ideal disinfectant for all uses.
On August 31, 1948, the defendant entered a plea of guilty
imposed a fine of $25 on each of three counts, or a total of $75.


dilution of one
kerosene or fuel
and was not an


, and


the court


2054. Adulteration and misbranding of "Fleecy White Laundry Bleach." U. S. v. 264 half-gallon
bottles, more or less, of "Fleecy White Laundry Bleach." Default decree of condemna-
tion, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. & F. No. 2496. I. D. No. 16211.)
An examination of "Fleecy White Laundry Bleach" showed that it contained
4.27 percent of sodium hypochlorite instead of the 5 percent claimed.
On January 17, 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 and condemnation of 264 half-gallon bottles,
more or less, of "Fleecy White Laundry Bleach" at Gary, Ind., alleging that the
product had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about January 20, 1948,
by the John Puhl Products Company, from Chicago, Ill., and charging that the
product was an adulterated and misbranded fungicide within the meaning of the


Insecticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its
below the professed standard or quality under which it
affixed to the bottles in which the product was packed s
INGREDIENTS: SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 5.25%
INGREDIENTS 94.75% BY VOLUME," whereas the pro
5.25 percent of sodium hypochlorite by volume and more
ingredients by volume.
The product was alleged to be misbranded in that
Ingredients: Sodium Hypochlorite 5.25% by volume. I


Strength or purity fell
L was sold as the labels
stated, in part, "ACTIVE
BY VOLUME. INERT
duct contained less than
than 94.75 percent inert


the statements, "Active
nert Ingredients 94.75%








704


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I. .


let stand in
borne on the
misleading in
less than 5.2[
94.75 percent
agent, that i


solution for about 5 minutes. Then rinse well in
labels affixed to the containers of the product, '
that the statements represented that the product
5 percent of sodium hypobhlorite by volume and
of inert ingredients by Volume, that the product w:
t would sterilize sickroom utensils, sputum cups,


and bedpans, and that
mentioned when used a
percent of sodium hypo
ingredients by volume,
sickroom utensils, sput
be relied on to disinfect


clear water,"
vere false andi
contained not-
not more than
as a sterilizing
rubber sheets,


it could be relied on to disinfect the places and articles
s directed, whereas the product contained less than 5.25
chlorite by volume and more than 94.75 percent of inert
it was not a sterilizing agent, it would not sterilize
um cups, rubber sheets, and bedpans, and it could not
the places and articles mentioned when used as directed.


On April 1, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
2055. Adulteration and misbranding of "Tobacine." U. S. v. 800 pounds, more or less, of
"Tobacine." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. & F. No.
2500. I. D. No. 17618.)


An examination of "Tobacine" showed that it was a dark brown vis
paste and contained an average of 5.4 percent of dichloro diphenyl trichloroet
(DDT), 18.2 percent of water, very small amounts of nicotine, methy
naphthalenes, mineral oil, and organic matter.
On April 18, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Eastern Distri
Washington, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed ii
District Court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 800 pounds,
or less, of "Tobacine" at Yakima, Wash., alleging that the product had
shipped in interstate commerce, on or about May 18, 1946, from Henderson,


3COUS
hane
lated

ct of
a the
more
been
Ky.,


by the American Nicotine Company, and charging that the product was an
adulterated and misbranded insecticide within the meaning of the Insecticide
Act of 1910.


The pro
below the
affixed to
Trichloroe
15 percent
The pro


duct was alleged t4
professed standard
the containers of t
thane (DDT) .
dichloro diphenyl
duct was alleged t


o be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
1 or quality under which it was sold as the labels
;hes)roduct stated, in part, "Dichloro-Diphenyl-
15%", whereas the product contained less than
trichloroethane (DDT).
Sbe misbranded in that the statement. "Dichloro-


Diphenyl-Trichloroethane (DDT) 15%," borne on the labels affixed to the
containers of the product, was false and misleading as the product contained
less than 15 percent of dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane (DDT).
On May 27, 1949, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
2056. Misbranding of "Sayf Moth Proofing Liquid." U. S. v. 41 five-gallon containers, more or
less, of "Sayf Moth Proofing Liquid." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture,.
and destruction. (I. & F. No. 2501. I. D. No. 17941.)
An examination of "Sayf Moth Proofing Liquid" showed that it consisted
of water and small quantities of compounds of aluminum, iron, calcium, potas-
sium, phosphorus, silicon, and a wetting agent.
On October 7, 1949, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 41 five-gallon containers,
more or less, of "Sayf Moth Proofing Liquid" at Chicago, Ill., alleging that the
product had been shipped in interstate commerce, on or about June 3, 1947, by
the Hoggatt Chemical Company, from Kansas City, Mo., and charging that the
*-i/^/n n A, n -v~c*r n -,n C. 5 ^ln .nn I3 nlan n/n A ..,4 ,-- t -- A- ,"Sr H J-t. 42L l,-/. w^ -. -^ -^ .- ,L JB J T- _. T -^. _- _" .t _. A t







2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


705


On April 18, 1950, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
2057. Misbranding of "'Repellit"; and adulteration and misbranding of "D. & P. 4 in 1 Spray."
U. S. v. Doggett-Pfeil Company, a corporation. Plea of guilty. Fine $250 on count two.
Counts one and three dismissed. (I. & F. No. 2454. I. D. Nos. 12977 and 12375.)
An examination of "Repellit" showed that it consisted of 26.8 percent of
water, 48.9 percent of isopropyl alcohol, and 24.3 percent of dimethyl phthalate
and perfume.
An examination of "D. & P. 4 in 1 Spray" showed that it consisted of 28.29
percent of lead arsenate, 4.3 percent of copper in the form of a copper compound,
3.04 percent of nicotine, and 64.37 percent inert ingredients.
On March 3, 1947, the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey,
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
an information, in three counts, against Doggett-Pfeil Company, a corporation,
alleging shipment in interstate commerce, on July 6, 1945, from Springfield,
N. J., to New York City, N. Y., of a consignment of bottles containing a product
known as "Repellit" and on May 22, 1946, from Springfield, N. J., to Silver


Spring, Md.,
4 in 1 Spray.
cide and the
and misbran
The produ'
partially of


of a consignment of bags containing a product known as "D. & P.
" The product "Repellit" was alleged to be a misbranded insecti-


oduct "D. & P.
* insecticide, w
"Repellit" was
irt ingredients


4 in 1 S
within the
alleged
(water


prevent, destroy, repel, or mitigate inse
containing the product did not have the
such ingredient stated thereon, nor did 1
and percentage amounts of each ingrec
the total percentage of inert ingredients
misbranded in that the labels affixed
stated, in part, "Repellit Repellent Lo
ing, picknicking, swimming, hunting, :
from the annoyance of insect pests," w]
ing in that the product would not keep
pests during all outdoor activities.
The product "D. & P. 4 in 1 Spray"


pray" was alleged to be at
meaning of the Insecticide
to be misbranded in that
and isopropyl alcohol), w.
cts, and the labels affixed t
names and percentage am(
the labels bear a statement
lent having insecticidal pr
. The product was alleged


to the bottles
tion *
fishing and all
which statements
one free from


Sadul
Act
it c(
which
:o the
counts
of th(
operti
to be


Iterated
of 1910.
insisted
did not
bottles
of each
e names
es, and
further


containing the product
Enjoy gardening, camp-
outdoor activities free
were false and mislead-
the annoyance of insect


vas alleged to be adulterated in that its


strength or purity fell below the professed standard or quality under which it
was sold as the labels affixed to the bags containing the product stated, in part,


"Active Ingredients-Lea
Inert Ingredients 45.4%
whereas the product con


4.4 percent nicotine,
percent total arsenic
The product "D.
the labels affixed to
Ingredients-Lead A
Ingredients 45.4%,
the product contain
nicotine, more than 4
arsenic expressed as
On February 17, :


more
expr
& sP.
the
Lrsen


1 Arsenate 47.0%, Metallic Copper 3.2%, N
-Total 100.0%, Total Arsenic, as mel
stained less than 47.0 percent lead arsena
than 45.4 percent inert ingredients, and
essed as metallic arsenic.
4 in 1 Spray" was alleged to be misbrai
bags containing the product stated, in i
ite 47.0%, Metallic Copper 3.2%, Nicotine


Total 100.0%, Total Arsenic
d less than 47.0 percent lead
15.4 percent inert ingredients,
metallic arsenate.
1948, the defendant entered


nicotine 4.4%,
tallic 9.3%,"
te, less than
less than 9.3


ended in that
art, "Active
4.4%, Inlert


, as metallic 9'.3%," whereas
arsenate, less than 4.4 percent
and less than 9.3 percent total


a plea


of guilty to count


and was fined $250. On January 7, 1949, on motion of the Government repre-
sentative, counts one and three of the information were dismissed.


90S2. A~iltrn~in oA ,nhrn~inc nf"Xnnn~lr ^Tw floaAj T~khn^n Pnn7^An TT Q

pr
ded
ct
ine


J







706


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I.F.


from Jersey
Jersey City,
"Knock 'Em'
insecticide w
In counts
February 9,
to the July


City, N. J., to Media, Pa., and, on or about February 9,
N. J., to Milford, Conn., of quantities of a product
Dead Tobacco Powder" which was an adulterated and
within the meaning of the Insecticide Act of 1910.
one and six relating, respectively, to the March 23,
1945, shipments of 5-pound containers and in count fc
5, 1944, shipment of 1-pound containers, the product


1945, from
known as
misbranded


1944, and
>ur relating
wvas alleged


to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell below the professed standard
or quality under which it was sold as the product was labeled, "Active In-
gredient-Nicotine 1.00%, Inert Ingredients 99.00%," whereas the product con-
tained less than 1.00 percent nicotine and more than 99.00 percent inert in-
gredients.
In counts two and seven relating, respectively, to the March 23, 1944, and
February 9, 1945, shipments of 5-pound containers and in count five relating to
the July 5, 1944, shipment of 1-pound containers, the product was alleged to be
misbranded in that the statement, "Active Ingredient-Nicotine 1.00%, Inert
Ingredients 99.00%," borne on the labels affixed to the containers of the product,
was false and misleading as the product contained less than 1.00 percent nico-
tine and more than 99.00 percent inert ingredients.
In counts three and eight relating, respectively, to the March 23, 1944, and
February 9, 1945, shipments of 5-pound containers, the product was alleged to
be further misbranded in that the statement, "G&O Knock 'Em' Dead Tobacco
Powder Net Weight---5 Lbs.," borne on the labels affixed to the bags
containing the product, was false and misleading as the bags contained less
than 5 pounds of the product.
On October 21, 1947, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to counts one
and four; and counts two, three, five, six, seven, and eight were dismissed. On
November 7, 1947, a fine of $500 was imposed but such sentence was suspended
and the corporation was put on probation for 1 year.
2059. Adulteration of "PETONE RIO." U. S. v. Associated Chemists, Inc. Plea of nolo con-
tendere. Fine $100. (I. & F. No. 2483. I. D. Nos. 15516, 14843, 14842, 14841, and
14064.)
An examination of samples taken from five shipments of "PETONE RIO"
showed that the velsicol 1068 content of the drums involved in such shipments
was 4.49 percent, none, 4.02 percent, none, and 5.68 percent, respectively, instead
of 20 percent of velsicol 1068 pure chemical or 22/2 percent of velsicol 1068 tech-
nical as claimed.
On December 29, 1947, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court an information against Associated Chemists, Inc., alleging shipments in
interstate commerce, on or about October 30, 1946, from Chicago, Ill., to Utica,
N. Y., on or about November 27, 1946, March 27, 1947, and April 14, 1947, from
Chicago, Ill., to Toledo, Ohio, and on or about February 14, 1947, from Chicago,
Ill., to Iacine, Wis., of consignments of a product known as "PETONE RIO"


which was an adulterated i
1910.
The product was alleged
low the professed standards
the drums did not contain
cent of velsicol 1068 techni
On October 7, 1948, the
court imposed a fine of $104


insecticide within the meaning of the Insecticide Act of


to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fel
Sor quality under which it was sold as the produce
20 percent of velsicol 1068 pure chemical or 22
cal, as claimed.
defendant entered a plea of nolo contender and
0.


lbe-
t in
per-

the







2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


707


an adulterated and misbranded
Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to
below the professed standard
affixed to the containers of t
Hypochlorite 5.25% by weight
the product contained less tha
and more than 94.75 percent of
The product was alleged to b
labels affixed to the containers
the labels stated, in part, (1)
by weight-Inert Ingredients:


d fungicide within the meaning of the Insecticide
be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
or quality under which it was sold as the labels
he product stated, "Active Ingredients: Sodiuxn


-Inert Ingredients:
n 5.25 percent of so
inert ingredients by
e misbranded in that
of the product, were
"Active Ingredients


94.75% by weight," whereas
hdium hypochlorite by weight
weight.
Sthe statements, borne on the
false and misleading in that
: Sodium Hypochlorite 5.25%


94.75% by weight" and (2) "Disinfects *


As a disinfectant: Thoroughly clean article. Immerse in a dilution containing
1 to 2 tablespoonfuls Bleach to each gallon of water," which statements repre-


sented that the produ
chlorite by weight and
and that the product w
infection, whereas the
chlorite by weight anr
and the product woul
disinfection.
On December 5, 194


ct contained not less than 5.25 percent of sodium hypo-
not more than 94.75 percent of inert ingredients by weight,
rould give a solution strong enough to provide efficient dis-
product contained less than 5.25 percent of sodium hypo-
d more than 94.75 percent of inert ingredients by weight,
d not give a solution strong enough to provide efficient


6,


the Central


City Pickle Company


having appeared as


claimant, a consent decree of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and it
was ordered that the product be destroyed and that the containers in which the
product was packed be returned to the Central City Pickle Company.
2061. Adulteration and misbranding of "Hot Foot Insect Killer." U. S. v. Jay B. Hazelrig and
Thomas B. Hazelrig, individuals, doing business as copartners under the name of the
American Chemical Company. Plea of guilty. Fine $200. (I. & F. No. 2498. I. D.
No. 17135.)


An examination of
of 41.67 percent in t
and a shortage of 40 pe
On March 17, 1949,
Alabama, acting upon


a sample of
he declared
recent in the
the United
a report b


"Hot ]
dichl
declare
States
y the


Foot Insect K
oro diphenyl
ed pyrethrins.
Attorney for
Secretary of


iller"


showed a shortage


trichloroethane


content,


the Northern District of
Agriculture, filed in the


District Court, an information, in two counts, against Jay B. Hazelrig and
Thomas B. Hazelrig, individuals, doing business as copartners under the style
and trade name of the American Chemical Company, alleging shipment in inter-
state commerce, on or about March 1, 1947, from Birmingham, Ala., to Jackson,
Miss., of a consignment of a product known as "Hot Foot Insect Killer" which
was an adulterated and misbranded insecticide within the meaning of the In-
secticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
below the professed standard or quality under which it was sold as the labels
affixed to the containers of the product stated, in part, "* HOT FOOT
INSECT KILLER ACTIVE INGREDIENTS, DICHLORO DIPHENYL
TRICHLOROETHIANE (DDT) 3.00%, PYRETHRINS .11% *,"
whereas the product contained less than 3 percent DDT (dichloro diphenyl tri-
chloroethane), and less than 0:11 percent pyrethrins.
The product was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements, "* *
HOT FOOT INSECT KILLER ACTIVE INGREDIENTS, DICHLORO
DIPHTENYL TRICHLOROETHANE (DDT) 3.00%, PYRETH-
RINS .11% *," borne on the labels affixed to the containers of
thi nrnonef were falsn and mi~sleadin in that the nrordnet contained lesg than








708


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I. F.


product was shipped in
the Pynol Company, fr
was an adulterated and


0


interstate commerce,
im Burlington, Iowa,
misbranded fungicide


on or about October 8, 1946, by
and charging that the product
within the meaning of the In-


secticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
below the professed standard or quality under which it was sold as the labels
affixed to the containers of the product stated, in part, "'Active Ingredients:
Calcium Hypochlorite, 7.25%, Inert Ingredients, 92.75%-100%. The inert
ingredients of this product consist of effective cleansing agents. Available
Chlorine 5.0%," whereas the product contained less than 7.25 percent of calcium


hypochlorite and les,
The product was a
Ingredients: Calciun
The inert ingredient
able chlorine 5.0%,"


PU
TA
FY
chl
RE


RIFYINC
INS *
ING *
orine to
ACTIONS


'I
x


GLA


s than 5 percent of available chlorine.
alleged to be misbranded in that the statements,
n Hypochlorite 7.25%, Inert Ingredients 92.75%,
s of this product consist of effective cleansing ag(
(2) "Net Contents 5 lbs.," and (3) "CLORO-C
SSWARE AND DISHES AT BARS A


* ONE PRODUCT FOR EITH]
* One-half ounce to a gallon of
approximate 200 P. P. M. (200 parts
FOR USING CLORO-CLEEN *


in clear water and purify in a solution of
or a good level tablespoonful to each ga
containing 200 parts per million of avi
SODA FOUNTAIN GLASSES. Wash ti
CLEEN. Then purify in a CLORO-CLEE
gallon of water. DIRECTIONS
To purify dishes, tableware, sick room ute
in a solution of CLORO-CLEEN. using on


t water. Rinse well in a fresh solution


1I
EL
1~
1~


(1t
tot


ents
LE
D


)
-r
0 C)
~4
Ii


3R CLEANING OR
water will provide a
per million.) *
* BAR GLASSES.


(:LORO-CLEEN using one-half
Ion of water. This gives a s
liable chlorine. Stir well. *
roughly in a solution of C]
N rinse using one-half ounce t
FOR HOME and HOSPITAL


nsils and fruit jars, w
e heaping tablespoonful
n using one heaping t


"Active
i1 100%.
Avail-
EN FOR
FOUN-
PURI-
vailable
* DI-
Rinse


ounce
solution
*
LORO-
o each
I USE.


ash thoroughly
to a gallon of
iblespoonful to


a gallon of warm water. MILK PLANT E
and other dairy utensils may be cleaned or purified by
of CLORO-CLEEN in the proportion of one tablespoon
After use, flush equipment with cold water and wash
of CLORO-CLEEN. CREAMERIES and ICE CRE


EQUIPMENT. Milk cans
washing with a solution
ful to a gallon of water.
with the warm solution
AM PLANTS. Holding


I A


tanks, mixers, sa
flushed with a so
each gallon of w


nitary
lution
ater.


piping, etc., should
of CLORO-CLEEN
CLORO-CLEEN is


1r


l be thoroughly
using one or two


a new,


modern


cleaned and then
tablespoonfuls to
and very efficient
., -


purifier. It contains active cleansing agents wnicn remove lipsticK, grease
films and prevent hard water streaks usually present after ordinary washing.
These cleansing agents render the glasses cleaner and more easily purified.
CLORO-CLEEN contains the chlorine producing elements necessary to comply
with health regulations pertaining to a bactericide, when used according to
instructions. Wash glasses or crockery thoroughly in the usual manner then
purify in CLORO-CLEEN solution. *" borne on the labels affixed to the
five-pound containers of the product, were false and misleading in that (1)
the product contained less than 7.25 percent calcium hypochlorite and less than
5 percent available chlorine, (2) the net contents of the containers in which the
product was packed was less than five pounds, and (3) a solution made with
one-half ounce of C('loro-Cleen, of the comnusition found, to 1 gallon of water


would contain
not be relied onr
mentioned whet


less than 200) parts per million pf available chlori
to purify, in the bacteriological sense, the articles
n used according to the directions given on the labels.


ne and


could


and surfaces


ho


*





NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


709


was shipped in interstate commerce, on or about November 13, 1945, by Carbon-
dale Wholesale Company, Carbondale, Ill., and charging that the product was
an adulterated and misbranded fungicide within the meaning of the Insecticide
Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to 'be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
below the professed standard or quality under which it was sold as the labels
affixed to the containers of the product stated, in part, "Active Ingredients:
sodium hypochlorite 5.25% by weight. Inert Ingredients 94.75% by weight,"


whereas the product contained less than 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite
weight and more than 94.75 percent inert ingredients by weight.
The product was alleged to be misbranded in that the labels affixed to
containers of the product stated, in part, (1) "Active ingredients: sodium h3


the
Tpo-


chlorite 5.25% by weight. Inert Ingredients 94.75% by weight," and (2) "As
a disinfectant: Thoroughly clean article. Immerse in a dilution containing 1 to
2 tablespoonfuls Bleach to each gallon of water," which statements were false
and misleading in that the statements represented (1) that the product con-
tained not less than 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite by weight and not more
than 94.75 percent inert ingredients by weight and (2) that when used as
directed the product would furnish a solution strong enough to effectively disin-
fect, whereas the product did not contain 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite by
weight and did contain more than 94.75 percent inert ingredients by weight
and when used as directed would not furnish a solution strong enough to effec-
tively disinfect.
On December 5, 1946, the Central City Pickle Company having appeared as
claimant, a consent decree of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and it
was ordered that the product be destroyed and that the containers in which the
product was packed be returned to the Central City Pickle Company.


2064. Adulteration and misbranding of "Hermox." U. S. v. 14,388 quart containers, more or
less, of "Hermox." Consent decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I. &
F. No. 2437. I. D. No. 14126.)
An examination of samples of "Hermox" showed that it was a solution of
sodium hypochlorite and that there was an average shortage of 25.14 percent
of sodium hypochlorite below the amount declared.
On October 11, 1946, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District
of Louisiana, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in
the District Court a libel praying seizure and condemnation Of 14,388 quart
containers, more or less, of "Hermox" at New Orleans, La., alleging that the
product was shipped in interstate commerce, on or about February 27, 1946,
by Fred Herman & Sons, from Chicago, Ill., and charging that the product
was an adulterated and misbranded fungicide within the meaning of the In-
secticide Act of 1910.
The product was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
below the professed standard or quality under which it was sold as the labels


affixed to
Sodium H
contained
cent inert
The pro
containers


the
ypoc
less
ingr
duct
of


Hypochlorite
Disinfects *
restaurants,


containers of the
hlorite 5.25%-In
than 5.25 percent
edients.
was alleged to b
the product stat


product stated, in part, "Active Ingredient:
ert Ingredients 94.75%," whereas the product
sodium hypochlorite and more than 94.75 per-


e misbranded in
d, in part, (1)


that the
"Active


labels affixed
Ingredient:
"Hermox
lution for
taverns, etc.


Sto the
Sodium
* *
dairies,
After


I
2


5.25%-Inert Ingredients 94.75%," and (2)
Germicide Disinfecting So
soda fountains, hospitals, institutions, hotels,


* Onia tt ,.-c, c + n noS r- 0170 l rhln nhlnrT ,inn 1 nn -wi ^11nn


nfi/lt n +0 *; ,, I n


2041-2066]








710


INSECTICIDE


ACT


[N. J., I. F.


On November 18, 1946, Fred Herman & Sons appeared as claimant and a
consent decree of condemnation was entered providing for the release of the
product under bond for the purpose of bringing it into compliance with the act.
The claimant forfeited the bond and on July 7, 1948, an amended decree of con-
demnation and forfeiture was entered and the United States marshal was
ordered to destroy the product.
2065. Adulteration and misbranding of "Energy Household Bleach." U. S. v. 1,056 one-gallon
containers and 1,424 quart containers, more or less, of "Energy Household Bleach."
Consent decree of condemnation and release under bond. (I. & F. No. 2404. I. D. No.
13621.)


An examination of samples of "Energy Household
was a sodium hypochlorite solution with an average
of sodium hypochlorite below the amount claimed.
On April 24, 1946, the United States Attorney for
Missouri, acting upon a report by the Secretary of


Bleach" showed that it
shortage of 13.14 percent

the Western District of
Agriculture, filed in the


District Court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 1,056 one-gallon con-
tainers and 1,424 quart containers, more or less, of "Energy Household Bleach"
at Joplin, Mo., alleging that the product was shipped in interstate commerce,
on or about February 8, 1946, by Fred Herman & Sons, from Chicago, Ill., and
charging that the product was an adulterated and misbranded fungicide within


the meaning of
The product
below the stan
the containers
(Sodium Hypo
GREDIENTS:
of sodium hypo
The product


the Insecticide Act of 1910.
was alleged to be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell
dard or quality under which it was sold as the labels affixed to


of the product stated, in part,
chlorite) 5.25%, INERT INGREDI
100.00%," whereas the product con
chlorite and more than 94.75 percent
was alleged to be misbranded in t


the labels affixed to the containers of the product
the labels represented that the product contained


"ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:
ENTS: 94.75%, TOTAL IN-
tained less than 5.25 percent
of inert ingredients.
hat the statements borne on
were false and misleading as
not less than 5.25 percent of


sodium hypochlorite and not more than 94.75 percent inert ingredients, whereas
the product contained less than 5.25 percent of sodium hypochlorite and more
than 94.75 percent of inert ingredients.
On June 26, 1946, Fred Herman & Sons having appeared as claimants, a con-
sent decree of condemnation was entered providing for the release of the product
under bond for the purpose of bringing it into compliance with the act.
2066. Adulteration and misbranding of "Carbola DDT Contains 2% DDT." U. S. v. Carbola
Chemical Company, Inc., a corporation. Plea of guilty. Fine of $100. (I. & F. No.
2502. I. D. No. 17421.)
An examination of "Carbola DDT Contains 2% DDT" showed that the product


contained an average of
the label of the product,
3 percent as claimed on
On March 7, 1950, tl


New York, acting i
District Court an in]
Inc., a corporation,
2, 1948, from Natur


"pon
forn
alle
l B


1.31 percent of DDT instead of 2 percent as
, and an average of about 0.92 percent phenol
the label of the product.
te United States Attorney for the Southern
a report by the Secretary of Agriculture,
ration, in two counts, against Carbola Chemic
ging shipment in interstate commerce, on or a
ridge, N. Y., to Frederick, Md., of quantities


claimed on
Is instead of

District of
filed in the
al Company,
bout March
of a product


known as "Carbola DDT Contains 2% DDT" which was an adulterated and mis-
branded insecticide within the meaning of the Insecticide Act of 1910.
In count one, the product "Carbola DDT Contains 2% DDT" was alleged to
be adulterated in that its strength or purity fell below the professed standard


or nualitv under which it was sold. as the nroduet was Inhbeled in nart "'


\fl'1'iVfl


[








2041-2066]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


711


ages of Carbola-DDT. After each scraping of floors and gutters dust Carbola
lightly. When thus used as a paint and dust beginning in May or June Oarbola
will continue to kill Flies, Spiders, Mosquitoes and Fleas by contact for three
months and will greatly reduce flies at milking time. Also apply dry onto
cattle in pasture against flies. RABBITS, DOGS, Against
chicken lice, apply dry Carbola through feathers. Apply as a dust in
flush toilets and outdoor toilets daily to control flies. *,"
whereas the product contained less than 3 percent phenols, less than 2 percent


dichloro
and whe
spiders, i


diphenyl trichloroethane, and more than 95 percent inert ingredients;
n used as directed on the label the product would not control flies,
mosquitoes and fleas in stock barns, lice on rabbits and dogs, or flies in


toilets, as claimed.
On June 6, 1950,
a fine o $50 on each


the defendant entered a plea of guilty, and the court imposed
Sof two counts, or a total of $100.


INDEX TO NOTICES OF JUDGMENT 2041-2066


N
N
Carbola DDT Contains 2% DDT:
Carbola Chemical Co., Inc....
Cloro-Clean:
Pynol Co-------------......
Energy Household Bleach:
Fred Herman & Sons_.-.__
EZ Bleach:
Central City Pickle Co-.......
Federal Bleach:
Carbondale Wholesale Co....
Central City Pickle Co---._..
Fleecy White Laundry Bleach:
John Puil Products Co- .--
Ford Brand Benny Hex *
Concentrate and Ford Brand Benny
Hex Insect Spray:
Ford Insecticide Corp ......
Hermox:


Fred Herman & Sons ....
High Up Laundry Bleach:
Roisman Products Co -----.
Guymon-Petro Mercantile Co.
Hill's Germorene and Hill's Hy-Pine
Disinfectant:
Arthur I. Hillman. ........
Ralph Hillman ..........
Hill Manufacturing Co----.
Hilltop Wood Preserver D-K-NO-MOR
Carbolineum and Hilltop Pine-O-5
Disinfectant:
Fred H. Moore .------------
Hilltop Laboratories ---......--


. J. No.
2066
2062
2065
2060
2063
2063
2054


2045
2064

2052
2052

2047
2047
2047


2053
2053


Hot


Klix
Knoc


Foot Insect Killer:
Jay B. Hazelrig------........._
Thomas B. Hazelrig----...
American Chemical Co......
Insecticide with DDT:
Acme Sales Co., Inc-----...
;k 'Em Dead Tobacco Powder:


N
* -
* -
* -
* -


Goulard & Olena, Inc ----...
Lee Chem Sure-Kill Insect Paint:
Farm & Home Products Co...
Moth Spra Liquid:
Hoggatt Chemical Co ....- -
Old Nick's Seed Treatment:
Ivan James Nickerson ......
Old Nick Seed Treatment Co


Old Nick's Seed
Old Nick
PETONE RIO:
Associate
Pur-O-Fone
Prophyla
Repellit and D.


Treatment:
Seed Treatment Co-.
d Chemists, Inc.....
ctic Products, Inc ....
& P. 4 in 1 Spray:


Doggett-Pfeil Co--- ......
Sayf Moth Proofing Liquid:
Hoggatt Chemical Co ......
The Amazing Benny Hex Insect
Spray:
Anzio Chemical Co..........
Tobacine:
American Nicotine Co-_--.---
Twen's Bleach:
Twenhofel Manufacturing Co-
Wonder Bleach:
Wonder Chemical Co- ...-..---


.J. No.
2061
2061
2061
2048
2058
2042
2046
2051
2051
2050
2059
- 2043
2057
2056

2044
2055
2049
2041


-~


F
.
.
.
.





UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
II ~I 1111 II1L ~II L I I~ l
3 1262 08582 5163



































0

eA
4r