1. Herbert B. Leggett, Early History of Wine Production in California (San Francisco, 1941), P. 112; Paul Fredericksen, The Authentic Haraszthy Story (San Francisco [1947]), p. 9; Thomas H. Pauly, "J. Ross Browne: Wine Lobbyist and Frontier Opportunist," California Historical Quarterly 51 (Summer 1972): 108. [BACK]

2. Pauly, p. 109. [BACK]

3. MS resolution of protest, Los Angeles Wine Growers' Association, 9 October 1869 (Wilson Papers, Huntington Library). [BACK]

4. Vincent P. Carosso, The California Wine Industry, 1830-1895 (Berkeley, 1951), p. 92; I. N. Hoag to Benjamin Wilson, 4 July 1872 (Wilson Papers). [BACK]

5. Carosso, California Wine Industry , p. 92. The association's first fair was held at Sacramento in September 1872: see the association's Transactions, 1872 , published in Transactions of the California State Agricultural Society, 1872 (Sacramento, 1873). [BACK]

6. Carosso, California Wine Industry , pp. 104-5. [BACK]

7. Sacramento Daily Union , 21 March 1872. [BACK]

8. George Husmann, American Grape Growing and Wine-Making , 4th ed. (New York, 1880), p. 173. California itself was then beginning to suffer serious destruction of its vineyards from phylloxera, but it was not yet allowable to admit the fact. [BACK]

9. For the committee's hearings, see "The Culture of the Grape," in Appendix to the Journals of the Senate and Assembly , 23d sess., 5, no. 16 (Sacramento, 1880). For the text of the Act, see California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, First Annual Report (San Francisco, 1881), pp. 5-8. [BACK]

10. The districts were Sonoma, Napa, San Francisco (including Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties), Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and El Dorado.

11. "First Report of the Committee on the Phylloxera, Vine Pests, and the Diseases of the Vine," p. 6, m California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, First Annual Report . This is the earliest established identification of the phylloxera in California, but there was general agreement that the pest had been in the state earlier than that: ibid., pp. 28—29. E. M. Stafford and R. L. Doutt, "Insect Grape Pests of Northern California," University of California, California Agricultural Experiment Station, Extension Service Circular no. 566 (1974), P. 62, state that phylloxera was discovered in California in 1852. Since it is usually supposed that the pest was introduced to California on vines imported from the eastern United States, this date, if correct, is evidence of very early importation indeed. Phylloxera had not even been identified in 1852, so the evidence for so early a date must be indirect. [BACK]

10. The districts were Sonoma, Napa, San Francisco (including Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties), Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and El Dorado.

11. "First Report of the Committee on the Phylloxera, Vine Pests, and the Diseases of the Vine," p. 6, m California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, First Annual Report . This is the earliest established identification of the phylloxera in California, but there was general agreement that the pest had been in the state earlier than that: ibid., pp. 28—29. E. M. Stafford and R. L. Doutt, "Insect Grape Pests of Northern California," University of California, California Agricultural Experiment Station, Extension Service Circular no. 566 (1974), P. 62, state that phylloxera was discovered in California in 1852. Since it is usually supposed that the pest was introduced to California on vines imported from the eastern United States, this date, if correct, is evidence of very early importation indeed. Phylloxera had not even been identified in 1852, so the evidence for so early a date must be indirect. [BACK]

12. Southern California Horticulturist 2 (November 1878): 16. [BACK]

13. See California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, First Atnnual Report of the Chief Executive Viticultural Officer, 1882 (Sacramento, 1882), pp. ix-xv. [BACK]

14. Maynard Amerine, "Hilgard and California Viticulture," Hilgardia 33 (July 1962): 3. An interesting meeting of Hilgard with the winegrowers of Sonoma is reported in San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Thirteenth Industrial Exhibition, 1878 (San Francisco, 1878), pp. 103-7.

After describing the phylloxera to them, Hilgard concluded that grafting to resistant American root-stocks, as the French were doing, would be necessary for "the vineyards of the future" (p. 106). [BACK]

15. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Annual Report, 1887 (Sacramento, 1888), p. 88. [BACK]

16. George C. Husmann, "Viticulture of Napa County," in Tom Gregory et al., History of Solano and Napa Counties (Los Angeles, 1912), pp. 148-49. [BACK]

18. International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report (San Francisco, 1915), P. 47. [BACK]

19. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Second Annual Report of the Chief Executive Viticultural Officer, 1882-3 and 1883-4 (Sacramento, 1884), pp. 103-51. [BACK]

20. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Annual Report, 1887 (Sacramento, 1887), pp. 61-62; id., Minutes, 9 March 1887 (MS, Bancroft Library). [BACK]

21. E.g., California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Second Annual Report of the Chief Executive Viticultural Officer , pp. 55-68, 103-51. [BACK]

22. See, e.g., San Francisco Merchant , 15 June 1883, p. 201, and 13 July 1883, p. 273. [BACK]

23. Husmann, American Grape Growing and Wine-Making pp. 166, 169. [BACK]

24. Charles Wetmore in California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Second Annual Report of the Chief Executive Viticultural Officer , p. 39. [BACK]

25. Wetmore, Ampelography of California , pp. 9, 10, 15, 16. [BACK]

26. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Second Annual Report of the Chief Executive Viticultural Officer , p. 40. Among the experimenters with new varieties, Wetmore names George West, J. H. Drummond, Charles Lefranc, and L. J. Rose.

27. Ibid., p. 42. [BACK]

26. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Second Annual Report of the Chief Executive Viticultural Officer , p. 40. Among the experimenters with new varieties, Wetmore names George West, J. H. Drummond, Charles Lefranc, and L. J. Rose.

27. Ibid., p. 42. [BACK]

28. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Annual Report, 1893-94 , appendix B, part 2 (Sacramento, 1894), pp. 46-48. [BACK]

29. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Minutes, 19 May 1884, 8 June 1885, 15 January 1887, 11 December 1888; minutes of the Executive Committee, 21 March 1895. [BACK]

30. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Annual Report, 1893-94 , p. 10.

31. Ibid., pp. 79-89. Among the prize-winners were Paul Masson, Isaac De Turk, Arpad Haraszthy, Charles Wetmore, and H. W. Crabb. [BACK]

30. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Annual Report, 1893-94 , p. 10.

31. Ibid., pp. 79-89. Among the prize-winners were Paul Masson, Isaac De Turk, Arpad Haraszthy, Charles Wetmore, and H. W. Crabb. [BACK]

32. Pacific Wine and Spirit Review , 30 August 1890. [BACK]

33. Lilian Whiting, Kate Field: A Record (Boston, 1899), pp. 458-59; California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Minutes, 11 December 1888. [BACK]

34. Irving McKee, "Historic Alameda County Wine Growers," California 43 (September 1953): 22; Janet Newton, "Cresta Bianca and Charles Wetmore: A Founder of the California Wine Industry" (Livermore, Calif.: Livermore Heritage Guild, 1974). [BACK]

35. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Minutes, 9 March 1887, 11 June 1888, 20 April 1889, 8 June 1891.

36. Ibid., 8 June 1891. [BACK]

35. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Minutes, 9 March 1887, 11 June 1888, 20 April 1889, 8 June 1891.

36. Ibid., 8 June 1891. [BACK]

37. Amerine, "Hilgard and California Viticulture," pp. 9-12. [BACK]

38. University of California College of Agriculture, Report of the Viticultural Work during the Seasons 1887-93 (Sacramento, 1896), p. 3.

39. See ibid., passim, for the sources listed for the analyses of specific varieties. [BACK]

38. University of California College of Agriculture, Report of the Viticultural Work during the Seasons 1887-93 (Sacramento, 1896), p. 3.

39. See ibid., passim, for the sources listed for the analyses of specific varieties. [BACK]

40. Adams, Wines of America , p. 300. Despite his name, Bioletti was an Englishman. [BACK]

41. See Bioletti's summary in University of California College of Agriculture, Report of the Viticultural Work. . . 1887-93 , pp. 379ff.

42. Ibid., p. 384.

43. Ibid., p. 409. [BACK]

41. See Bioletti's summary in University of California College of Agriculture, Report of the Viticultural Work. . . 1887-93 , pp. 379ff.

42. Ibid., p. 384.

43. Ibid., p. 409. [BACK]

41. See Bioletti's summary in University of California College of Agriculture, Report of the Viticultural Work. . . 1887-93 , pp. 379ff.

42. Ibid., p. 384.

43. Ibid., p. 409. [BACK]

44. University of California College of Agriculture, Report of the Viticultural Work during the Seasons 1885 and 1886 (Sacramento, 1886); Reports of Experiments on Methods of Fermentation and Related Subjects (Sacramento, 1888); Report of the Viticultural Work during the Seasons 1887-89 (Sacramento, 1892). [BACK]

45. Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Proceedings, Ohio Grape-Wine Short Course, 1973 (Wooster, Ohio, 1973), p. 63. [BACK]

46. California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Minutes of Executive Committee, 20 February 1893; Carosso, California Wine Industry , p. 192. [BACK]

47. The ancestor of the Department of Viticulture and Enology at the University of California, Davis. Many of the records of both the board and the university department went up in smoke when the Agriculture Building at Berkeley burned in 1897. [BACK]

48. At the beginning of the 1880s, when the California industry began to respond to the possibility of supplying phylloxera-smitten Europe with wine, the total quantity of wine exported from the state was only 154,000 gallons. By 1890 the figure had risen to 393,000 gallons, and would reach a peak of 1,623,000 gallons in 1898. This was a notable increase but made only a small proportion of the total increase in production over those years ( Report of California State Board of Agriculture , 1911 [Sacramento, 1912], p. 203). [BACK]

49. Charles Wetmore, Treatise on Wine Production , appendix B to the Report of the Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, 1893-94 (Sacramento, 1894), pp. 5-6, 37-38. On this matter, Wetmore and Hilgard were at one. In a letter called "Plain Talk to the Winemen" in the San Francisco Examiner , 8 August 1889, Hilgard explained the depressed market in California wine as a simple consequence of "the poor quality of the larger part of the wines made and their immaturity when put on the market." ''The foreign guest at our principal hotels might be aghast," Hilgard wrote, "at having the claret cork fly at him, followed by a significant puff of smoke, and a liquid resembling sauce rather than wine and of uncanny odor: the label assured him that it was all fight and that such was the nature of California wine." Such deplorable results were the outcome of equally deplorable methods. The California winemaker, "after crushing promiscuously grapes sound, moldy, green and sunburnt... allows his fermenting tanks to get so hot as to scald the yeast, and then wonders why the wine has 'stuck'; permits the 'cap' to get white with mold and swarming with vinegar flies and then cheerfully stirs it under so as to thoroughly infect the wine with the germs of destruction." [BACK]

50. Wetmore, Treatise on Wine Production, p. 35 .

51. Ibid., p. 36. [BACK]

50. Wetmore, Treatise on Wine Production, p. 35 .

51. Ibid., p. 36. [BACK]

52. Adams, Wines of America , p. 172; Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California (1954), p.1. [BACK]

53. For the history of the California Wine Association, see Ernest P. Peninou and Sidney S. Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III. The California Wine Association ([San Francisco?] 1954); and Ruth Teiser and Catherine Harroun, Winemaking in California (New York, 1983), pp. 157-60. The seven firms forming the CWA were Kohler & Frohling, Kohler & Van Bergen, C. Carpy & Company, B. Dreyfus & Company, S. Lachman & Company, the Napa Valley Wine Company, and Arpad Haraszthy & Company. [BACK]

54. "The California Wine Association," company brochure (n.p., n.d. [San Francisco? c. 1910?]) (Huntington Library). [BACK]

55. Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III , p. 5.

56. Ibid., p. 30.

57. Ibid., p. 31. [BACK]

55. Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III , p. 5.

56. Ibid., p. 30.

57. Ibid., p. 31. [BACK]

55. Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III , p. 5.

56. Ibid., p. 30.

57. Ibid., p. 31. [BACK]

58. "The California Wine Association" (brochure cited n. 54 above). [BACK]

59. Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III , pp. 19-20.

60. Ibid., pp. 21 - 22. [BACK]

59. Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III , pp. 19-20.

60. Ibid., pp. 21 - 22. [BACK]

61. Husmann, Grape Culture and Wine-Making in California , p. 344. [BACK]

62. Robert Louis Stevenson, "Napa Wine," in The Silverado Squatters (London, 1883). [BACK]

63. International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report , p. 29. Lachman adds: "As California wines began to improve, instead of giving them a half blend of foreign wine the blend was reduced to possibly about 80 per cent California and 20 per cent French. The demand in wine at that time was for a French label, mostly fictitious brands" (ibid.). [BACK]

64. "California Wine Association" (brochure cited n. 54 above).

65. Ibid. [BACK]

64. "California Wine Association" (brochure cited n. 54 above).

65. Ibid. [BACK]

66. Hiram S. Dewey, in International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report , p. 302.

67. Ibid. [BACK]

66. Hiram S. Dewey, in International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report , p. 302.

67. Ibid. [BACK]

68. Peninou and Greenleaf, Winemaking in California: III , pp. 28- 29; Teiser and Harroun, Winemaking in California , pp. 158-59. [BACK]

69. Adams, Wines of America , p. 279; Teiser and Harroun, Winemaking in California , p. 150. [BACK]

70. For the figures on California wine production, see Report of the State Board of Agriculture , 1911, p. 191. [BACK]

71. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the First Industrial Exhibition, 1857 (San Francisco, 1858), p. 58. [BACK]

72. Illustrated History of Sonoma County (Chicago, 1889), p. 571; San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Eleventh Industrial Exhibition (San Francisco, 1876), p. 162. [BACK]

73. Agoston Haraszthy, "Wine-Making in California," Harper's 29 (June 1864): 28. [BACK]

74. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Sixth Annual Industrial Exhibition, 1868 (San Francisco, 1868), pp. 39-40. [BACK]

75. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Twenty-Third Industrial Exhibition, 1888 (San Francisco, 1888), p. 121. [BACK]

76. California Farmer , 7 October 1863, p. 69. [BACK]

77. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Seventh Industrial Exhibition, 1869 (San Francisco, 1869), p. 39. [BACK]

78. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Ninth Industrial Exhibition, 1874 (San Francisco, 1874), p. 55. [BACK]

79. E. T. Meakin, "The Engineer's Part in the Advancement of the Viticultural Industry," in International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report , p. 250. [BACK]

80. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Twenty-Third Industrial Exhibition, 1888 , pp. 85-86. [BACK]

81. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Twelfth Industrial Exhibition, 1877 , p. 142. [BACK]

82. San Francisco Mechanics' Institute, Report of the Ninth Industrial Exhibition, 1874 , p. 54; Report of the Nineteenth Industrial Exhibition, 1884 (San Francisco, 1885), p. 78. [BACK]

83. Meakin, "Engineer's Part," in International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report , p. 251. [BACK]

84. Quercus suber , the cork oak, grows quite happily in California, but it has never been commercially exploited there so far as I know. No doubt the labor costs of harvesting and processing the bark make the idea unattractive. Spain and Portugal continue to supply the world. [BACK]

85. San Francisco Merchant , 25 May 1883, p. 137. [BACK]

86. San Francisco Directory , 1889; California Board of State Viticultural Commissioners, Report of the Sixth Annual State Viticultural Convention (Sacramento, 1888), p. 84; Illustrated History of Sonoma County , p. 252. [BACK]

87. San Francisco Merchant , 13 April 1883, p. 3. [BACK]

88. International Congress of Viticulture, Official Report , p. 15. The rest of the description of the congress is drawn from this source. [BACK]

89. Frank Morton Todd, The Story of the Exposition (New York, 1921), 4:302. [BACK]