16851. Misbranding1 and alleged Adulteration of Nip-a-Co capsules. V. S. 
v. 15% Dozen Packages of Nip-a-Co. Default decree of confisca- 
tion and destruction.    (F. & D., No. 23510.    I. S. No. 03488.    S. No. 1617.)
On March 15, 1929, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
West Virginia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in 
the District Court of the United States for said district a libel praying seizure 
and condemnation of 15% dozen packages of Nip-a-Co capsules, remaining un- 
sold in the original packages at Wheeling, W. Va., alleging that the article 
< 
had been shipped by Frederick Stearns & Co., from Detroit, Mich., on or about 
September 15, 1928, and transported from the State of Michigan into the State 
of West Virginia, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation 
of the food and drugs act as amended,
Analysis of a sample of the article by this department showed that it con- 
sisted essentially of acetanilid, cinchonine sulphate, magnesium carbonate, 
capsicum, extracts of plant drugs including podophyllum and jalap, traces 
of salicylic acid, and alkaloids of aconite.
It was alleged in the libel that the article was adulterated in that its strength 
and purity fell below the professed standard and quality under which it was 
sold, viz, the container of the said article bore the statement " Each Capsule 
contains    *    *    *    and cod liver oil extract."
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement on the container, 
" Each Capsule contains * * * with cod liver oil extract," was false and 
misleading in that the article contained no extract of cod-liver oil. Misbrand- 
ing was alleged for the further reason that the said container bore the state- 
ments. " For the relief of * * * Neuralgia, La grippe," which statements 
were false and fraudulent, since the article contained no ingredients or com- 
bination of ingredients capable of producing the curative and therapeutic effects 
claimed.
On May 22, 1929, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment 
was entered finding the product misbranded and subject to confiscation, and 
it was ordered by the court that the said product be destroyed by the United 
States marshal.
AETHtm M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture. 
'{' >\