160 THINIDAD AND TOBAGO BULLETIN. [XIX. 3, 



AGEICULTIJEAL EDUCATION. 



CACAO PRIZE COMPETITION 1920-21-NARIVA 



AND MAYARO. 



Report of thes Judges. 



"\Ye have the honour to report that fiffcj--six peasant proprietois and 

 seventy-one contractors entered the competition ; twenty-eight of 

 .the forraer and twenty seven of the latter worked up to January, the 

 * others dropped out for various reasons. Out of this number, nine of the 

 former and eleven of the latter were selected for the final judging which 

 began on April 18 and ended on April 22, 1921. 



The average percentages of marks obtained by the prize winners are 



as follows : 



Tillage. Saiiitafion. General, 



Class I ... 86-29 82-86 77-85 



Class II ... 84-28 95-71 90-00 



This result is not only excellent, but an improvement on last year's 

 "work. Contractors again showed a better class of work in all branches 

 of the competition except forking and manuring. 



Tillage. Draining on the whole was well done and maintained. 

 Among the contractors Singh Ram, Puncham, "Watts and Suroojnarine 

 Maharaj obtained 100 per cent. ; and Suenunnun, Walters and Phulsingh 

 90 per cent. ; among the proprietors Piacha obtained 100 per cent.,. 

 Etwaria and Valdez 95 per cent., and George Samuel 90 per cent. We 

 are pleased to be able to state that both classes of competitors realize 

 the benefits to be derived from draining hilly portions of their holdings, 

 a method which is not generalh' adopted. 



Forking and manuring require more attention, j-et much praise is due 

 to Samuel, .Racha, Etwaria and Valdez — proprietors, and Singh Ram,. 

 Suenunnun and Walters — contractors for the very good work done in 

 these lines. 



Sanitation. Speaking generally, sanitation, one holding only being 

 excepted, was ver3' good. We cannot recommend too highl}' the excellent 

 work in this part of the competition of Singh Ram, Suenunnun, 

 Puncham, Walters, Watts and Suroojnarine — contractors and George 

 Samuel — proprietor. 



Theory. All prize winners and one non-prize winner in Class II, as 

 well as four of the prize winners in Class I obtained full marks ; this 

 speaks highly for the interest they take in their occupation. 



A remarkable feature of this competition is that although two of the 

 competitors are hard of hearing, three understand very little English and 

 Singh Kara (Winner of the 1st prize in Class II) can neither speak nor 

 understand English, every one of them took a lively interest in the work 

 and have all won prizes. 



Some of last year's prize winners have done much good by their 

 example and advice, in encouraging their neighbours to do good work, 

 as shown by the fact that xnany of this year's prize winners are the 

 neighbours of last year's. Singh Earn, Suenunnun and Puncham are 



