The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1899-01-14
THROW up The WHOLE THING
WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH
THE SCHEME.


Rodgers, Patterson & Slack, the San
Francisco firm of lawyers who were IN
terested in the contracts with various
counties for collecting certain moneys
assumed to be collectable from the
State, ON technical error in the print
ed statutes, have decided to drop the
matter so far as they are concerned.
The San Francisco Bulletin" of last
evening prints the following statement
made by Judge Patterson to the Super
visors of that city:
The Finance Committee of the SUI
pervisors met this morning to consider
the contract of the city and county with
the law firms of Devlin & Devlin OF
Sacramento and Rodgers, Paterson q
Slack of San Francisco, whereby the
lawyers agreed to recover money due
the city from the State as commissions
for collecting State taxes. Mayor Pine
Ian discovered that the attorneys per-
centage fees would amount to $7OO,COO,
and that the State would get the money
back in the form of taxes. At the last
meeting the board resolved to rescind
the contract. and referred the matter
for consideration to the Finance Com
mittee.
when the committee met Van R.
Patterson was called on by Supervisor
Perrault to explain the attorneys side
of the case. He stated that Messrs.
Devlin & Devlin of Sacramento had
consulted the firm of Rodgers, Patter-
son & Slack on the question Of the val
iddty OF that Act Of the Legislature
which deprived the counties of the
right to fees for collecting the State
taxes. Rodgers, Patterson & Slack gave
their opinion Of the validity of the Act,
without regard to the question whether
the Act had received the requisite num-
her Of votes in the Legislature. The
discovery that the Act had received In
the Senate only twenty, and not the
necessary twenty-one votes, was made
only a. few weeks ago, and after the
contracts with the counties had been
signed.
"Devlin & Deviin had suggested adj
vising the several counties of their
rights in the matter. When the con-
tracts were entered into Rodgers, Pat
terson & Slack had no idea that the
amount of money involved was as great
as it has proved to be.
Judge Patterson regretted that some
of the counties had become dissatis-
| fled with their contract, but his firm
was willing to act toward San Fran
cisco or any other county as it would
act and always has acted in cases when
any client has professed dissatisfaction
with the services or methods of the
firm The client may withdraw from
his contract by paying the expenses I'm
dergone by the attorneys
"Devlin & Devlin of Sacramento made
all the negotiations in the present mat
ter, Rodgers, Patterson & Slack declin-
ing to undertake any expenditures.
Therefore, Judge Patterson continued,
his firm had been put to no expense.
and claimed nothing from the city and
county of Sam Francisco. AS far as that
firm was concerned the contract was at
an end.
But Judge Patterson desired to en-
phasize the point that his firm had been
guilty of no unconscionable or other
ton, he hoped, would satisfy the Mayor
and the Supervisors of the entire inno-
cence Of the motives and intent of
Rodgers, Patterson & Slack.
Had the firm attempted to deceive
any Of the counties it would be the first
time that it had SO acted toward a eli
ent. During may years the members
of the firm of Rodgers, Patterson &
Slack had held reputation for honor
and integrity, and it was too late, Judge
Patterson trusted, for the firm to COM
mence questionable practices. He de-
sired only that justice be done and a
proper regard be shown for the reputa-
ton of Rodgers. Patterson & Slack.
Judge Slack supplemented the expla-
nation made by Judge Patterson. He
disclaimed any deception or unfair con-
duct on the part of his firm, but re-
marked that Devlin & Devlin had
stated the case from their point of view
in a communication to the board. Rod
gers, Patterson & Slack spoke only for
themselves.
CLERK Russell then read letter
from Devlin & Devlin. The Sacramento
lawyers made excuses similar to those
made by Messrs. Patterson and Slack,
but alleged that they had incurred ex-
penses, which ought to be repaid to
them before Devlin & Devlin retired
from the contract. The communication
did not state the amount of the ex-
penses incurred by the Sacramento
firm The name of Rodgers, Patterson
& Slack had been signed with that of
Devlin G. Devlin to the communication,
but Judge Slack, perceiving it, erased
the name Of his firm, which had been
affixed without authority.
Mayor Phelan, who was present,
said that he believed in the innocence
OF Rodgers. Patterson & Slack He
proposed a resolution generating that
firm from all imputation of improper
conduct. The resolution was approved
by the committee. The committee will
recommend that the board, without
promising to pay the money ask Devlin
& Devlin what is the amount of their
claim for expenses incurred. Then the
board may either rescind or modify the
contract"
Articles Of Incorporation.
The following articles of incorpora-
ton have been filed in the office Of the
M Of