Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident Due to planned maintenance there will be periods of time where the website may be unavailable. We apologise for any inconvenience.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 July 2012
Public accounting practice and the nature of the accounting profession itself has, in the years under consideration, been shaped by a series of external forces. The Great Depression stimulated codification and regulation of practice. Further refinements of auditing procedures were introduced in the wake of the McKesson & Robbins case. The basic question of who was authorized to practice received almost continuous attention, and was the subject of much legislation and some important legal action. World War II introduced new practices, added responsibilities, and certain difficulties. And finally, the emergence of a strong national organization provided the profession with a means for achieving internal consistency and the capacity for co-ordinated reaction to rapid external change.
1 Stempf, Victor H., “The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Accountant,” The New York Certified Public Accountant, VIII (April, 1938), 12.Google Scholar
2 Johnson, Harlan, “New York Stock Exchange Questionnaire,” The Journal of Accountancy, XLVIII (July, 1929), 19.Google Scholar
3 “Financial Statements for Stock Exchange,” The Journal of Accountancy, XLII (July, 1926), 37.
4 May, George O., “Influence of the Depression on the Practice of Accountancy,” The Journal of Accountancy, LIV (Nov., 1932), 336.Google Scholar
5 The actual announcement may be found in “Stock Exchange Demands Audits of Listed Companies,” The Journal of Accountancy, LV (Feb., 1933), 82.
6 May, George O., “The Economic and Political Influences in the Development of the Accounting Profession,” in Fifty Years of Service, 1898–1948 (New Jersey: New Jersey Society of Certified Public Accountants, 1948), p. 11.Google Scholar
7 Editorial, “Accountants and the New York Stock Exchange,” The Journal of Accountancy, LV (April, 1933), 242Google Scholar.
8 Editorial, “Great Responsibility and Great Opportunity,” The Journal of Accountancy, LV (Feb., 1933), 83Google Scholar.
9 Editorial, “Chicago Stock Exchange Requires Certified Statement,” The Journal of Accountancy, LV (May, 1933), 321Google Scholar.
10 “Testimony of Expert Witnesses at Securities and Exchange Commission Hearings,” The New York Certified Public Accountant, IX (April, 1939), 318.
11 DeMond, C. W., Price, Waterhouse and Company in America (New York, 1951), p. 274.Google Scholar
12 Ibid., p. 273.
13 “Independent Audits in America,” The Accountant, CII (April, 1940), 370.
14 “The American Institute and Audit Procedure,” The Accountant, C (Feb., 1939), 263.
15 Stempf, , “The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Accountant,” The New York Certified Public Accountant, VIII (April, 1938), 12.Google Scholar
16 “Extension of Auditing Procedure,” The Accountant, C (June, 1939), 850.
17 Ibid.
18 Lenhart, Norman J., “Development in Auditing Procedures since the Extension of Such Procedures in 1939,” The New York Certified Public Accountant, XVII (Sept., 1947), 565.Google Scholar
19 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 13 (Jan., 1942), pp. 111–18.
20 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 15 (Sept., 1942), pp. 123–34.
21 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 17 (Dec., 1942), pp. 147–50.
22 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 19 (Dec., 1942), pp. 155–62.
23 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 21 (Dec., 1943), pp. 171–77.
24 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 25 (April, 1945), pp. 203–14.
25 Accounting Research Bulletin No. 26 (Oct., 1946), pp. 215–22.
26 “After Hearings, the S.E.C. Dismisses 11 (e) Proceedings against Barrow, Wade, Guthrie and Company Growing out of Drayer-Hanson Case,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXVII (June, 1949), 514.
27 Phillips, Jay A., “A Summary of State Legislation during the 1946–1947 Season Affecting Accountants,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXIV (Aug., 1946), 131.Google Scholar
28 Coates, Charles F., “State Legislation Relative to the Practice of Accountancy,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXII (Sept., 1946), 224.Google Scholar
29 Ibid., p. 225.
30 Ibid., p. 226.
31 Editorial, “Restrictive Act Upheld,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXIII (Jan, 1937), 10Google Scholar.
32 Winn, William R., “The Case against Regulatory Accountancy Legislation,” The South Carolina C.P.A., V (Oct., 1947), 4.Google Scholar
33 Miller, Robert L., “Why Regulatory Accounting Legislation Is Unsuccessful,” Public Relations and Legislative Control of the Accounting Profession (New York: American Institute of Accountants, 1951), p. 30.Google Scholar
34 Wilcox, E. B., “The Pros and Cons of Regulatory Legislation,” The Indiana Certified Public Accountant (May, 1948), 3.Google Scholar
35 Cranstoun, William D., “Restrictive Legislation,“ The New Jersey C.P.A. Journal, XXII (Nov., 1951), 1.Google Scholar
36 Miller, “Why Regulatory Accounting Legislation Is Unsuccessful,” Public Relations and Legislative Control of the Accounting Profession, p. 31.
37 Phillips, , “A Summary of State Legislation during the 1946–1947 Season Affecting Accountants,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXIV (Aug., 1947), 135.Google Scholar
38 Miller, “Why Regulatory Accounting Legislation Is Unsuccessful,” ibid., p. 31.
39 Winn, “The Case against Regulatory Accountancy Legislation,” ibid., 7.
40 Emanuel Saxe, “Role of the Society in Accounting Education,” in The New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants, Fiftieth Anniversary, p. 25.
41 Editorial, “College Degree as C.P.A. Prerequisite,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXIII (May, 1937), 321Google Scholar.
42 Editorial, “Educational Program of the American Institute,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXIX (March, 1945), 228Google Scholar.
43 Webster, Norman E., “Planned Examination,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXV (April, 1943), 348.Google Scholar
44 American Institute of Accountants chart, “Year in which State Used the Uniform C.P.A. Examination.”
45 Editorial, “A Single National Organization,” The Certified Public Accountant, XV (Oct., 1935), 604Google Scholar.
46 Jay, Harry M., “Consolidation — Now What,” The Certified Public Accountant, XVI (Oct., 1936), 569.Google Scholar
47 Editorial, “The Consolidation,” The Certified Public Accountant, XVI (Sept., 1936), 517.
48 Editorial, “Institute's Annual Meeting,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXII (Sept., 1936), 164Google Scholar.
49 Editorial, “Proposed Amendments to By-Laws,” The Certified Public Accountant, XVII (Feb., 1937), 10Google Scholar.
50 Maxwell, David F. and Charles, William, “National Conference of Lawyers and C.P.A.,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXI (Feb., 1946), 121.Google Scholar
51 Editorial, “Practice before Treasury Department,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXVIII (July, 1939), 1Google Scholar.
52 Ibid. (Aug., 1939), 79.
53 “Lawyers and Accountants,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXVII (June, 1944), 512.
54 Maxwell, and Charles, , “The National Conference of Lawyers and Certified Public Accountants,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXI (Feb., 1946), 124.Google Scholar
55 Brundage, Percival F., “The Bercu Case,” The New York Certified Public Accountant, XVII (May, 1947), 278.Google Scholar
56 “Official Decisions and Releases — Text of the Bercu Case,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXIII (April, 1947), 348.
57 “Official Decision and Releases — Lawyers' View of Accountants' Practice before Tax Court,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXV (May, 1948), 434.
58 Editorial, “Bercu Case on Tax Practice Upheld in New York Court of Appeals,” The Journal of Accountancy, LXXXVIII (Aug., 1949), 93Google Scholar.
59 “National Conference of Lawyers and Certified Public Accountants,” The Journal of Accountancy, XCI (June, 1951), 871.
