THE SOLICITOR. 899 



to pay fines amounting to $100 and costs aggregating $73.06. The 

 cases are important in that tlie Government lias, after a contest by 

 the defendant, succeeded in establishing to the satisfaction of a court 

 and jury the position taken by this department that the article 

 labeled as Maraschino cherries, without qualification, should be 

 packed in Maraschino cordial or liqueur produced in Dalmatia, Austria. 



An important question involving the construction of section 2 of 

 the food and drugs act was decided in favor of the Government by the 

 United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in the 

 case of United States v. The Dr. J. L. Stephens Co. and is now pend- 

 ing on appeal by the defendant m the United States Circuit Court of 

 Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The case grows oiit of a shipment 

 from Ohio into the District of Columbia by the defendant company 

 (which operates a sanitarium for the cure of drug habitues at Lebanon, 

 Ohio, and also conducts treatment for the cure of drug habit by mail) 

 of a quantity of medicme containing alcohol and opium, which sub- 

 stances were not declared on the label of the package containing said 

 medicine, as required by section 8, paragraph 2, in the case of drugs. 

 The shipment was made in response to an application for treatment 

 and a remittance sent by an inspector of this department to the de- 

 fendant company. The case was tried upon an agreed statement of 

 facts. Two contentions were made by the defendant as to the proper 

 construction of section 2 — first, that the information failed to charge 

 a shipment of the article in an original, unbroken package, and 

 therefore failed to charge an offense under section 2 of the act; second, 

 that the act does not apply to the interstate shipments of medicines 

 compounded from a prescription of a regularly licensed, practicing 

 physician, as in the present case. The court decided adversely to 

 the defendant upon both these points and imposed a fine of $50 and 

 costs. The defendant lias sued out a WTit of error in the Circuit 

 Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which will review the judg- 

 ment of the trial court. 



In the case of United States v. J. L. Hopkins Co. an information 

 was filed against the defendant in the Circuit Court of the United 

 States for the Southern District of New York charging the interstate 

 shipment of a quantity of broken senna alleged to be adulterated in 

 that it differed from the standard of strength, quality, and purity 

 laid down in the United States Pharmacopoeia and alleged to be mis- 

 branded in that it was labeled so as to inaicate that it was composed 

 entirely of broken senna leaves, whereas, in fact, it contamed seeds, 

 stalks, and other foreign matter. The defendant moved to quash 

 the information and the court granted the motion insofar as it related 

 to the adulteration charge. The court, however, denied the motion 

 in regard to the misbranding charge, and this question was submitted 

 to tlie jury upon the evidence and the jury returned a verdict of not 

 guilty. 



In the case of United States v. The Piso Co., a prosecution for the 

 interstate shipment of a quantity of "Piso's Cure * * * For 

 Coughs and Colds," alleged to be misbranded in that the amounts of 

 chloroform and cannabis indica in the product were less than the 

 . amount stated on the label, the jury in the District Court of tlie 

 United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania rendered a 

 verdict of guilty. Upon a motion by defendant for a new trial and 

 arrest of judgment the court set aside the verdict on the ground that 



