284  National  Agricultural  Examination  Board. 
Jonathan  ALAN  Robotham,  Harper-Adams  Agricultural  College,  Newport,  Salop. 
Harry  RANDOLPH  Taylor,  Harris  Institute,  Preston. 
John  Percy  Thompson,  Harris  Institute,  Preston. 
JUSTIN  JOICEY  ARMSTRONG  WALLACE,  Midland  Agricultural  and  Dairy  College. 
Kingston.  Derby. 
JAMES  HERBERT  Wood,  Leeds  University. 
GORDON  Burdass  YOUNG,  Harper-Adams  Agricultural  College,  Newport,  Salop. 
5.  The  Reports  of  the  Examiners  in  the  five  subjects 
included  in  Part  I.  are  as  follows : — 
1.  Agricultural  Botany.  (200  Marks.) 
Professor  John  Percival,  M.A.,  F.L.S. 
The  work  of  the  candidate*  this  year  was  of  somewhat  unequal  merit.  The  hest 
men  were  well  trained,  but  many  of  the  candidates  showed  very  imperfect  acquain- 
tance with  the  subject,  some  of  them  ha  ving  received  little  or  no  practical  instruction 
in  it.  Without  neglecting  the  botany  of  seeds,  grasses,  and  other  agricultural  plants, 
more  time  should  he  devoted  to  thp  examination  of  common  parasitic  fungi.  The  grains 
and  ears  of  the  chief  cereals  should  receive  more  attention.  Some  of  the  candidates 
confused  the  ears  of  bearded  wheat  with  those  of  harley,  and  a few  had  apparently 
never  seen  either  the  grain  or  ears  of  rye. 
2.  Mensuration  and  Land  Surveying.  (200  Marks.) 
Mr.  H.  Trustram  Eve,  F.S.I. 
The  plotting  in  connection  with  both  surveying  and  levelling  was  well  done.  There 
appears  to  he  a great  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  various  scales.  With  regard  to 
Ordnance  Maps,  there  is  an  annual  improvement  in  respect  to  these.  The  questions 
in  mensuration  were  in  many  cases  incorrectly  answered,  and  in  some  cases  the 
methods  adopted  were  much  too  lengthy. 
3.  General  Chemistry.  (200  Marks.)  Professor  W.  W.  Fisher,  M.A. 
The  general  character  of  the  work  was  satisfactory,  and  the  note-books  produced 
by  the  candidates  showed  that,  most  of  them  had  been  through  an  adequate  course  of 
practical  work  in  the  laboratory.  Some  had  done  quantative  analysis  of  food  stuffs, 
milk.  &c„  but  the  majority  had  only  bad  one  year’s  training.  Weakness  in  Organic 
Chemistry  was  noticed  in  certain  instances,  while  in  others  the  Physical  Questions 
were  not  as  well  answered  as  they  should  be,  but  on  the  whole  the  work  was  at  least 
equal  to  the  standard  reached  in  former  years. 
4.  Geology.  (100  Marks.)  Dr.  J.  E.  Marr,  M.A.,  F.R.S.,  P.G.S. 
The  performances  of  the  candidates  were  this  year  exceptionally  good.  The  answers 
in  the  papers  showed  that  the  candidates  had  studied  the  subject  with  thoroughness, 
and  the  oral  examination  indicated  that  they  were,  in  most  cases,  able  to  think,  and 
not  merely  to  acquire  imparted  knowledge. 
5.  Agricultural  Zoology.  (100  Marks.)  Prof.  J.  Arthur  Thomson,  M.A. 
About  three-fourths  of  the  candidates  showed  a sound  elementary  knowledge  of 
Agricultural  Zoology.  About  a third  showed  a very  creditable  familiarity  with 
common  insects  of  practical  importance.  Very  few  made  any  mistake  in  classifying 
the  insect  and  the  other  specimen  supplied  as  part  of  the  written  examination.  The 
more  practical  questions  were  answered  more  effectively  than  those  which  involved 
general  understanding,  and  in  many  cases  too  much  detail  was  given  in  regard  to  modes 
of  treatment.  Quite  a number  noted  more  than  six  different  methods  of  dealing  with 
a turnip  field  infested  with  “flea-beetle,”  and  were  apparently  without  any  clear  idea 
of  what  an  embryo  was.  It  is  very  desirable  that  more  attention  should  be  given  to 
making  simple  drawings  of  the  mouth-parts  of  insects  and  the  like. 
6.  The  Examiners  in  the  five  subjects  included  in  Part  II. 
report  as  below  : — 
6.  Practical  Agriculture.  (500  Marks.)  Mr.  T.  A.  Dickson,  Dr.  R. 
Shirra  Gibb,  and  Professor  W.  McCracken. 
The  Examiners  are  pleased  to  be  able  to  state  that  although  there  were  few  candi- 
dates who  stood  out  as  markedly  excellent,  the  general  standard  was  in  their  opinion 
up  to  the  average  of  previous  years.  They  have,  however,  again  to  report  that, 
the  knowledge  possessed  by  some  of  the  candidates  was  very  local  in  character, 
and  that  many  of  those  who  had  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  practice  on  a 
dairy  farm  had  only  a superficial  knowledge  of  sheep  and  arable  farming,  and— 
although  not  in  such  a marked  degree — the  candidates  who  had  practical  experience 
