§ Mr. LONSDALEasked whether the right hon. Gentleman considered the powers of his Department under the Bread Act and the Merchandise Marks Act to institute proceedings against manufacturers who fraudulently adulterate flour; and whether, in view of the extent to which this practice is resorted to, he will direct that immediate measures shall be taken for the protection of the public?
Mr. BUXTONI am advised that the Board of Trade have no duties under the Sale of Bread Act, 1836, in respect of the adulteration of bread or flour. As regards the Merchandise Marks Act, the matter would seem in view of the provisions of the 1194 Merchandise Marks (Prosecutions) Act, 1894, to fall within the province of my hon. Friend the Secretary of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to whom I notice that a similar question is being addressed.
§ Mr. LONSDALECan the right hon. Gentleman say if it is a violation of the Bread Act and the Merchandise Marks Act to sell as flour a substance which contains added phosphates made from the bones of animals or lime and sulphuric acid?
Mr. BUXTONMy answer to that is that as far as the Board of Trade is concerned, the Government have no jurisdiction in the matter. As regards the latter part, it comes under the province of the Board of Agriculture, and I understand that my hon. Friend is prepared to answer a question in regard to this matter.
§ Mr. LONSDALEasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture if it is intended to put into operation the powers possessed by the Board of Agriculture under the Merchandise Marks Acts to take proceedings against manufacturers who fraudulently adulterate flour; and, if not, whether he will state the reasons why the department are not carrying out the duty imposed upon them by Parliament for the protection of the public?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir E. Strachey)The Board have no information of any specific case in which it is alleged that an offence has been committed under the Merchandise Marks Act in connection with flour.
§ Mr. LONSDALEIs it within the province of the Board of Agriculture to make inquiries If they have to be made by another Department of the Government, will the hon. Gentleman inform me to whom we are to address the question? It has already been repudiated by the President of the Board of Trade.
§ Sir E. STRACHEYI can assure my hon. Friend I shall be only too glad to inquire into this matter if he will only give me the names of any manufacturers and see whether we cannot take action.
§ Mr. LONSDALEDoes the hon. Gentleman consider it is a violation of the Bread Act and of the Merchandise Marks Act to sell as flour substances which contain phosphates made from the bones of animals, or lime and sulphuric acid? Does lie consider that comes within his province?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYI should be very glad to ask the legal advisers of the Board of Agriculture whether it is, as the hon. Member alleges, an illegal practice?
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTIs it not a fact that a serious case of adulteration of flour has been brought to the notice of the Board, and they have declined to prosecute?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYNo specific case has been brought before the Board. If the hon. Member will only himself bring names before the Board we will be only too glad to inquire into it.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEWill the hon. Gentleman use the staff of inspectors of his Department and have samples taken?
§ Mr. LONSDALEIs the hon. Gentleman aware that the failure of his Department to take action is a direct encouragement to fraud?