0750. Misbranding of Pratt's cholera remedy, poultry regulator, animal 
regulator, and hog cholera specific. U. S. * * * v. Pratt Food 
Co., a Corporation.     Plea of nolo contendere.     Fine, $25.     (P. & D.
No.  10896.     I. S. Nos. 4870-p, 4874-p, 4875-p,  6811-p.)
On November 24, 1919, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in, 
the District Court of the United States for said district an information against 
the Pratt Food Co., a corporation, Philadelphia, Pa., alleging shipment by said 
company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, from the State 
of Pennsylvania into the State of Florida, on or about December 12, 1917, of 
a quantity of Pratt's cholera remedy, and on or about March 16, 1918, of quan- 
tities of Pratt's poultry regulator and Pratt's animal regulator, respectively, and 
from the State of Pennsylvania into the State of North Carolina, on or about 
December 11, 1917, of a quantity of Pratt's hog cholera specific, all of which 
were misbranded.
Analyses of samples of the articles by the Bureau of Chemistry of this depart- 
ment showed that the Pratt's cholera remedy consisted essentially of iron sul- 
phate, aluminum sulphate, and ginger; that the Pratt's poultry regulator con- 
sisted essentially of fenugreek seed, ginger, fennel, gentian, nux vomica, char- 
coal, sulphur, calcium carbonate, and iron sulphate; that the Pratt's animal 
regulator consisted essentially of fenugreek seed, ginger, fennel, gentian, nux 
vomica, charcoal, salt, and iron sulphate; and that the Pratt's hog cholera 
specific consisted essentially of fenugreek seed, gentian, charcoal, salt, sulphur, 
and a small amount of ferrous sulphate.
Misbranding of the articles was alleged in substance in the information 
for the reason that certain statements, designs, and devices regarding the 
therapeutic and curative effects thereof, appearing on the labels of the pack- 
ages containing the respective articles, falsely and fraudulently represented 
that the Pratt's cholera remedy was effective as a treatment, remedy, and cure 
for chicken cholera; that the Pratt's poultry regulator was effective to prevent 
chicken cholera, roup, gapes, and all common ailments of poultry and as a 
treatment, remedy, and cure for chicken cholera, roup, gapes, and all com- 
mon ailments of poultry; that the Pratt's animal regulator was effective to pre- 
vent hog cholera and as a treatment for hog cholera; and that the Pratt's hog 
cholera specific was effective to prevent hog cholera and as a treatment, remedy, 
and cure for fig cholera, when, in fact and in truth, they were not.
On June 15, 1921, a plea of nolo contendere to the information was entered 
on behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $25.
C. W. PUGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.