b'Below left: Adolph Feez c.1920 by S Spilsbury. Below: Heinrich Rthning c.1910 by S Spilsbury.in the late 1880s. Another major source of work was theyears of age, retired from practice and Feez became the Brisbane Municipal Council for whom the firm acted insenior partner of the firm for the next thirty years. Before several high-profile appeals before the Privy Council. the merger, the two firms faced off in Anning v Anning, a protracted dispute about the estate of William Anning, By 1895, however, relationships began to sour. Miskin leftwhich was closely followed by the local newspapers.to establish his own firm and in 1898 MacPherson and Feez decided to dissolve their partnership. A very public spatIn 1927 the firm changed its name to Feez Ruthning & Co ensued over who should retain the Brisbane Municipal(until the & Co was removed in 1986). From its earliest Council work. Following the dissolution of MacPherson &days, the Brisbane firm maintained a close relationship with Feez, Feez carried on practice under his own name untilGeorge Allens firm in Sydney, providing services to clients 1906 when he was joined by Arthur Baynes to form thewith operations in Queensland, such as the Bank of New firm Feez & Baynes. MacPherson retained the BrisbaneSouth Wales. The merger with Allen Allen & Hemsley in Municipal Council work. 1996 was a significant milestone. It was a natural extension of the close relationship between the two firms, which had In 1911 Rthning and his son joined with Feez & Baynes toexisted for 150 years. form Feez, Rthning & Baynes. Heinrich Rthning, at seventy 77'