484 



ANNUAL REPORTS OF DErARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



tlie decree of the coiut provided that tlie product frhould be sorted and 

 t])at portion found unfit for food should be destroyed. 



At the close of the year 9G7 cases "were pending, of which 330 were 

 ci'iniinal prosecutions and G37 were seizures. 



In addition to the cases reported by this department to the Depart- 

 ment of Justice, the food and drugs officials of the various States and 

 the District of Columbia, colJaborating with the department in the 

 enforcement of the act. are sliown by the records of tliis office to have 

 reported ."i.j cases to the Ignited States attorneys wliich Avere termi- 

 nated during the year. Of these, 42 were criminal cases and 13 were 

 seizures. In all of the criminal cases there were ])lcas of guilty or 

 nolo contendere, or the collateral deposited by defendants was for- 

 feited on account of their nonapjtearance. In all of the seizure 

 cases, except one in Avhich the goods Avere not located, decrees were 

 entered and the products released on bond in 4 cases, desti-oyed in G, 

 and ordered sohl in '2 cases. The fines or amounts forfeited as col- 

 lateral in the criminal cases Avere as follows: 



Fines ill food and ilniy c<(-'<€h hcyiiii hi/ Uiiil'd Sfatoi (dtornnjfi} 



' One personal bond taken. 



Three hundred notices of judgment were published during the year. 



FOOD AND DRUGS CASES OF INTEREST. 



In the case of the United States r. 141 bottles, etc., of drug products 

 (F. & D., 9377), inAolving the seizure of a drug knoAvn as "A Texas 

 "Wonder" in the Southern District of Texas, Avhich was labeled in 

 such manner as to claim for it certain therapeutic and medicinal 

 properties, the intervening claimant pleaded res adjudicata by reason 

 of a verdict and judgment of not guilty in a criminal proceeding in- 

 stituted against the shipper of the article in the Eastern District of 

 JMissouri. In the present case the court denied the plea of former 

 judgment for the reason that — 



ail cssfiifial oltMuent of tlie offense inider this act is tlie stntomont of niiiul of 

 (Iffendant, a factor necessarily subject to constant clianpe. To contend that a 

 prosecution or proceedin;; which turned not, as most offenses do, on the com- 

 iiiission «if the overt act, hut on the state of mind of the defendant; would con- 

 stitute a bar to a pmceedintr based upon the defendant's state of mind at a later 

 date, is essentially unsound. 



In commenting on the fraudulent character of the labeling the 

 court said : 



The defendant admits that ho is not himself a physician, thouf^h many of his 

 circulars and advertisements declare him to be " Pr. E. W. Hall," nor does he 

 claim for himself any special medical skill or knowledge. He relies most 

 larj^ely upon the fact of the sales to thousands of purchasers, and the numerous 

 and filowiuK testimonials about cures, which he no doubt received, as an evi- 

 dence that he could not be jruilty of fraud in the matter. But the slightest re- 

 flection upon the well-known fact that persons ^'iven to self-medication are 

 credulous and partisan, and prone to deny nature credit for their recovery, and 



