3947. Misbranding of anesone triduo.  U. S. v. Pasquale Gargiulo.   Plea of guilty.  Fine, $40.
(F. & D. No. 4687.   I. S. No. 3183-d.)
On June 11,1913, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the?
United States for said district an information against Pasquale Gargiulo, doing business?
under the name and style of P. Gargiulo & Co., New York, N. Y., alleging shipment?
by said defendant, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on January 26, 1912, from?
the State of New York into the State of Massachusetts, of a quantity of so-called?
anesone triduo, which was misbranded. The product was labeled in the Italian lan??
guage, a translation of said label being as follows: "Anesone Triduo of our manufac??
ture has met the taste of all by its indisputably superior qualities. Disposes the?
stomach to regular digestion. When mixed with water it makes a hygienic and de??
licious beverage. When mingled with coffee it develops a delicate and aromatic per??
fume.   Premium distillery.   Martini Sons."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department?
showed the following results:
Alcohol (per cent by volume)?
 46.16
Alcohol (per cent by weight)?
 37. 66
Refractive index of distillate?
       49
Methyl alcohol by refractometer?
None.
The article contains alcohol which is not declared upon the label. It was ascer??
tained in connection with the examination of the product that it was manufactured?
in the United States. Misbranding of the product was alleged in the information?
for the reason that it was labeled and branded so as to deceive and mislead the pur??
chaser thereof, in that the label of the article would indicate that it was a foreign?
product, to wit, a product of Italy, when it was not so and was a product of the United?
States. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the product purported?
to be a foreign product, to wit, a product of Italy, when it was not so, but was a prod??
uct of the United States. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that it failed?
to bear a statement on the label of the package thereof of the quantity or proportion of?
alcohol contained therein, whereas alcohol was one of the ingredients of said drug?
to the extent of 46.16 per cent by volume.
On November 5, 1913, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the information,?
and the court imposed a fine of $40.
B. T. GALLOWAY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, March SO, 1914.