“Many Troubles Kill Pioneer,” Los Angeles Times, February 14, 1910, II1.
“Distillers Pay Fine,” Los Angeles Herald, March 9, 1910, 14. The author extends thanks and gratitude to Richard Alden Clark.
“Reasons for Cheap Brandy,” Los Angeles Times, February 3, 1910, I9. Eleven days later, the Times wrote of the death of one of the brothers, alluding to stress from the raid as its cause.
“Sixth District Takes Lead,” Los Angeles Times, June 5, 1910, V20.
San Francisco Call, March 26, 1910, 11.
For an in-depth discussion of tax collection laws and the Fifth Amendment, see Leslie Book, “The Collection Due Process Rights: A Misstep, or a Step in the Right Direction?” Houston Law Review 41, no. 4 (2004), with special attention to pages 1180–1181.
Ajay K. Mehrotra, Making the Modern American Fiscal State: Law, Politics and the Rise of Progressive Taxation, 1877–1929 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 285.
For a helpful explanation of what exactly “income” means to different entities, see http://www.tax-freedom.com/WhereDoesIncomeComeFrom.htm.
For a helpful discussion of support and rejection of the Sixteenth Amendment, see Ajay Mehrotra, “Envisioning the Modern American Fiscal State: Progressive-Era Economists and the Intellectual Foundations of the U.S. Income Tax,” 52 UCLA Law Review 1793 (2005).
R. Rudy Higgens-Evenson, The Price of Progress: Public Services, Taxation, and the American Corporate State, 1877–1929 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013), 1163.
See Mehrotra, Making the Modern American Fiscal State, for a complete discussion of the transition between the 1909 Corporate Tax Law and 1913's ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, and the philosophical history behind both.
For example: Los Angeles Herald, Classified section, September 2, 1894.
Anne Hilker, A History of Parker, Milliken, Kohlmeier, Clark & O'Hara: The History and Growth of the Firm, Unpublished manuscript, in the possession of the author.
See, for example, “Markets of the World,” Los Angeles Herald, July 16, 1896, 10; Classified sections, Los Angeles Herald, July 26 and August 2, 1896.
“Los Angeles Reform Club: Purity in Politics Its Platform for the Campaign,” San Francisco Call, July 13, 1896, 3.
“Office Seekers.: Their Name is Legion and the Number Increases …”, Los Angeles Times, September 30, 1896, 11.
“Tonight's Caucuses,” Los Angeles Times, October 2, 1896, 11.
“City Taxes: Growth of Los Angeles,” Los Angeles Times, December 8, 1899, 10.
Los Angeles Herald, October 13, 1898, 9.
San Francisco Call, March 24, 1898, 13.
“L. A. Magna Charta,” Los Angeles Herald, July 30, 1898, 5.
Los Angeles Herald, January 24, 1899, 2.
Later, in 1903, a Los Angeles mayoral committee even recommended that after the city collector and assessor's positions were folded into county ones, that the county ones be cut and the county tax collector's duties be absorbed by the county treasurer. This specter was probably the catalyst for Parker to run for this office in 1906, albeit unsuccessfully.
“Many Shooters Out … “, Los Angeles Herald, February 23, 1903, 4.
“Where Deer Are Thick: Los Angeles Men Find a Hunters' Paradise,” Los Angeles Times, B1.
“Hunters Shoot Bear and Deer: Angelenos Have Great Sport on American …”, Los Angeles Times, September 29, 1907, VIII1.
Governor George Pardee, inaugural address, delivered January 6, 1903, http://governors.library.ca.gov/addresses/21-Pardee.html (retrieved March 4, 2014).
A Resume of California's Tax Structure, 1850–1955: Report to the California Legislature, 21.
Los Angeles Herald, June 5, 1905, 2.
Mehrota, Making the Modern American Fiscal State, 250.
Higgens-Evenson, Price of Progress, 1197.
For complete summary of this issue, see Higgens-Evenson, 8–10.
Los Angeles Herald, September 22, 1909, 2.
For a full transcript of this speech, see John T. Woolley and Gerhard Peters, The American Presidency Project: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=68517.
“Taft's Corporation Tax,” New Orleans Times-Picayune, August 3, 1909, 6.
“New Revenue Office Ready,” Los Angeles Times, June 27, 1909, II9.
Ibid; Los Angeles Herald, February 28, 1909, 6.
It is not known exactly where Parker went to law school, but it was most likely Los Angeles Law School, which was later folded into the University of Southern California's College of Law.
Los Angeles Times, June 27, 1909, II9.
Los Angeles Herald, November 6, 1910, 7.
“Gunning for Corporations: Internal Revenue Collector Full of Troubles …”, Los Angeles Times, September 2, 1909, II1.
Ed Fuentes, “An Inland Vintner Keeps Southern California's Wine Traditions Alive,” KCET SoCal Focus, http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/history/a-vintner-keeps-southern-californias-wine-traditions-alive.html. For a comprehensive history of post-Mission era winemaking in southern California, see Thomas Pinney's A History of Wine in America: From the Beginnings to Prohibition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989).
Alan M. Olmstead and Paul W. Rhode, Quantitative Indices on the Early Growth of the California Wine Industry, Robert Mondavi Institute Center for Wine Economics, UC Davis, 2009.
A colorful description of southern California's wine resurgence can be found in the Los Angeles Times, “Spouting Wine Will Add to Prosperity …”, September 29, 1906, II1.
E. Bartlett Webster, Report on the Northern District of Lower California … (San Diego: Press of Frye & Smith), 1913.
“New Revenue Office Ready,” Los Angeles Times, June 27, 1909; Wine and Spirit Bulletin 30 (Louisville, KY: Bulletin Publishing Company), 1916.
“Gunning for Corporations,” Los Angeles Times, September 2, 1909, II1.
The Supreme Court considered fifteen cases regarding the tax. Simply speaking, plaintiffs primarily argued that it was a direct excise tax, and therefore unconstitutional. Of secondary concern was that the publication of returns from a corporation could be considered illegal search and seizure.
“Waking Up to New Tax Law,” Los Angeles Times, February 25, 1910, II14.
“New Revenue District Rich …”, Los Angeles Times, July 1, 1910, II1.
“Not One Cent Outstanding: Collector Gets Last Bit of Corporation Tax,” Los Angeles Times, October 28, 1910, II1.
“Southern Winemen Will Enter Complaint,” August 26, 1910. It was not entirely altruistic of Cabell and Parker to consider these complaints. They wished to have a better rapport with winemakers so the latter would faithfully report medicine makers, who bought wine in bulk and boiled it down for the brandy, thereby avoiding paying the tax on the pure liquor.
On Guasti, see: Susan Straight, “Spirits of Guasti: Between the 60 and the 10” Boom: A Journal of California 2 (Winter 2012): 60–67.
“Largest Vineyard Visited,” Riverside Morning Enterprise, September 2, 1910, 3.
“Junketing,” San Bernardino County Sun, September 1, 1910, 6.
“Worth While,” Fresno Morning Republican, August 31, 1910, 4.
“Royal Cabell is An Honored Guest of Fresno,” Fresno Morning Republican, September 3, 1910, 11.
“Uncle Sam Trying to Help the Wine Man,” Los Angeles Times, October 11, 1910, II1; “Hope to Help the Industry: Local Option Law Shackles Wineries,” Los Angeles Times, October 14, 1910, II1. Parker was also keenly aware that if planters were not incentivized to keep vineyards, the state would lose its table grapes industry. Additionally, he would lose a source of tax income in the form of “raisin mash,” which could travel well back east and be used as a wine fortifier.
“Four Million Gallons of Wine This Year,” Los Angeles Times, August 29, 1911, II1.
“Shipping News of the Coast,” San Francisco Call, November 2, 1912, 27.
“Revenues Growing,” Los Angeles Times, II2.
“Corporations Must Hurry,” Los Angeles Times, February 17, 1912, II3; “Hurry, You Corporation!” Los Angeles Times, March 1, 1912, II1.
“After the Delinquents …”, Los Angeles Times, March 17, 1912, II11.
“He Works on the Sly,” Los Angeles Times, May 2, 1912, II9.
Charles F. Spillman, “History of California Oil,” Sunday Magazine section, 3.
“500 Concerns Are Delinquent …”, Los Angeles Herald, March 2, 1910, 7.
“Doldrum Days Unknown Here …”, Los Angeles Times, September 1, 1912, II8.
“Tour of Inspection: Internal Revenue Collector to Look Over Oil Fields …”, Los Angeles Times, September 18, 1912, II3; Los Angeles Times, “Oil Accounts Under Glass …”, October 8, 1912, II5; “New Basis for Income Taxing: Oil Corporations Likely to Win Contention …”, Los Angeles Times, November 27, 1912, II3.
Ibid., “New Basis for Income Taxing,” Los Angeles Times.
“Hungry Patronage Seekers Camp on Trail of Kettner,” San Diego Union, March 16, 1913, 11.
“A Drag. Works' Support Harms Carter,” Los Angeles Times, March 19, 1913, I4.
Hilker, 3. Parker was probably waxing sentimental here, since Wilson publicly announced his removal in July 1913, and probably privately by May, so there would be a smooth transition by the end of the fiscal year in June. Also, Parker had already toured the district with Carter by then, handing over files. He even hosted a few parties in his honor.
“Double Taxation,” Los Angeles Times, January 14, 1914, I7.
“Income Tax is Hymen's Foe,” Los Angeles Times, January 27, 1914, II3.
Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920).
See, for example, the San Francisco Chronicle, March 9, 1920, 2.
Technically, there were three acts. One was instituted in 1916, largely in anticipation of America's entry into the conflict.
During these few years, personal income tax rose from 7 percent up to 77 percent, depending on level of earnings. Corporations saw their “excess profits” tax rise to anywhere from 20 to 60 percent on business income. For an in-depth discussion of taxes, lawyers, and fiscal polity surrounding the conflict, see Ajay K. Mehrotra, “Lawyers, Guns, and Public Monies: The U. S. Treasury, World War I, and the Administration of the Modern Fiscal State,” Law and History Review 28 (February, 2010), 185.