§ Mr. HUNTasked the hon. Member for South Somerset, in how many cases since the Merchandise Marks (Prosecution) Act of 1894 proceedings have been taken by Government officials against persons fraudulently selling foreign beef or mutton as British?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYNo such proceedings have been taken by the Board.
§ Mr. HUNTAre we to understand that for 15 years no prosecution has been taken, and that the fraudulent sale of beef and mutton has been going on all the time?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThe reason why no proceedings have been taken is that no case has been brought to the notice of the Board in which the evidence was clear enough for a conviction. Of course, if the hon. Member will bring forward a case the Board will be very glad to take it up.
§ Mr. HUNTIs not the hon. Gentleman perfectly well aware that the fraudulent sale of foreign meat at Smithfield is continually going on, and is it not the duty of the Government, by virtue of the Merchandise Marks Act, to see that the British people are not swindled?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThe hon. Member does not quite understand the facts. It does not arise upon the Merchandise Marks Act. Cases have been brought before us occasionally, but the evidence was not enough to secure a conviction, or 1918 we should have been glad to pursue the matter.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEMay I inquire whether the inspectors of the Board of Agriculture have not gone about in the City of London and other large towns with the object of detecting these frauds, and can the hon. Gentleman assure the Members that they do not eat foreign meat in this House?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThat question should be addressed to the Chairman of the Kitchen Committee.
§ Mr. PATRICK O'BRIENThey take it "sitting down."