Two statements are given, followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. Assuming the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.

Statements:

All wings are whites.

No whites are wands.

Conclusions:

I. Some wings are wands.

II. No wand is a white.

To determine which of the conclusions logically follow from the given statements, we can analyze the relationships using Venn diagrams or logical deduction.

1. Analysis of Statements:

- "All wings are whites."
This statement means that the set of "wings" is entirely contained within the set of "whites". In terms of a Venn diagram, the circle representing "wings" lies completely inside the circle representing "whites".

- "No whites are wands."
This statement means that there is no intersection between the set of "whites" and the set of "wands". The circle representing "whites" and the circle representing "wands" are completely disjoint (separate).

2. Evaluation of Conclusions:

- Conclusion I: "Some wings are wands."
Since all "wings" are inside "whites", and no "whites" can overlap with "wands", it is impossible for any "wings" to be "wands". Therefore, no wings are wands, and Conclusion I is false.

- Conclusion II: "No wand is a white."
The second statement explicitly says "No whites are wands". The relationship of disjointness is mutual; if no A is B, then no B is A. Thus, "No wand is a white" is logically equivalent to the given statement and must be true. Therefore, Conclusion II follows.

Conclusion:
Only conclusion II logically follows from the given statements.