A question of great interest to agricultural and horticultural pursuits was recently decided by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Justice Gordon giving the opinion of the court. A Pennsylvanian bought from a firm in Dubuque 140 tierces of pork. The purchaser received, opened, and thought it good; but a week or so afterwards found the whole unfit for sale. There could be no doubt but the seeds of decay were in the pork before it was sold by the Dubuque firm. The court of Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia decided that a man ordering pork expected to get good pork; as this was not actually good pork, the seller must return the money paid. The Supreme Court sets aside this decision. There was no warranty, it says, for good pork. The only question involved is, was it salable ? That it was salable is proved by the fact that the buyer accepted it, and discovered nothing the matter with it for some time. The buyer had as good a chance to see whether there was anything the matter with it as the seller. Unless there was a distinct warranty given that it was perfectly sound, it is the purchaser's risk. That he expected sound meat, had nothing to do with the question.

The decision of the lower court was reversed and the buyer lost his case.