# Bales (2002) on Daniel "Peg Leg" Sullivan — argument, measurements, caveats
Source: Richard F. Bales, *The Great Chicago Fire and the Myth of Mrs. O'Leary's Cow* (McFarland, 2002; the digitized copy is the later McFarland paperback printing, ISBN 0-7864-2358-7, "first published in 2002 by McFarland").
All quotations are verbatim OCR fragments from the Open Library search-inside API (Internet Archive item greatchicagofire0000bale); `qNNNN` = query id in query_log.tsv (the raw JSON responses are not included in this folder). Square-bracketed ellipses mark fragment boundaries; text joined by chaining is continuous unless [GAP] is shown. Page numbers are given only where a running head, TOC line or figure number inside a fragment reveals them. Longer continuous runs of text are in chains_dump.md (chain ids given).

## 1. Where Sullivan said he was (Sullivan's own words, App. D, and Bales's paraphrase)
- App. D (chain D_dsull_sw, q0046 + chaining): "...other side of the street from Leary. Q. Did you stand there? A. Isat [sic] down on the sidewalk, a big high sidewalk that was there. There was a great big high fence not as high as that door. I sat ..."
- App. D [255]–[256] (D_dsull_256, q0071): "...about twenty minutes past nine to twenty-five minutes past nine.(n) [256] Said I, “It is time for me to [go in ...]"; and (q0073) "Q. The fire broke out about half past nine? A. Yes sir, from twenty to twenty-five minutes past nine."
- App. B (B_appB1, q0009): "[Daniel Sullivan] left the house, and, while on the opposite side of the street ..." and (q0107) "? A. I was on the other side of the street, same as if I was seated ..." (Sullivan quoted).
- Bales, chapter (B_loc, q0046): "[... he] made for the door.’ Later in his testimony, Sullivan clarified his location, stating that he was sitting on the sidewalk, by a fence “at the head of White’s house or head of his lot.” William White did own land east of Sullivan’s property; it was across the street, on the south side of DeKoven [Street ...]"
- Bales (B_sull2, q0093/chaining): "[the fence,] which was probably located along the front lot line between DeKoven Street and William White’s property.(n) Why did Sullivan do this? Why did Sullivan walk across the street, walk past his own home, and sit in front of White’s house for what may have been almost half an hour? Mr. McLaughlin had played his fiddle ..."
- Bales (q0054): "house, as at least one neighboring home blocked his view. Sullivan testified that while in front of White’s ..."
- Bales, section heading (B_crumb, q0067): "Sullivan’s Testimony Crumbles— He Could Not Have Seen the Fire. By utilizing Chicago real estate [records ...]"; bullet (B_concl): "startling conclusions are revealed: • Sullivan could not have seen the fire from his position in front of William [White's ...]"

## 2. The properties (Chicago Title & Trust ante-fire tract books), Figure 51 / Figure 64
- (B_blk1, q0063) "[lots ...] wide and 118 feet deep. The O’Learys lived in Block 38 in this subdivision. As platted, DeKoven Street ..."; (B_los4 chaining) "The lots in the subdivision in which the O’Learys lived were all originally 50 [feet wide ...]"; (B_blk2) "appropriating a 15-foot-wide strip of land in Block 38. This land was taken for use as an alley, running ..."
- (q0056/q0058) "In 1864, she [Catherine Sullivan] was deeded lot 18 in a subdivision of Block 38 of School Section Addition to Chicago. In 1865 ..."; "She purchased all of lot 18 in 1864 and the west half of lot 19 a year later" (Figure 64).
- (B_lots6) "[the three Sullivan half-lots:] described as the west half of lot 18, the middle halflot was the east half of lot 18, and the half-lot on [the east ... west half of lot 19]"
- (B_lots1+2 merged) "[Daniel Sullivan] must have lived in a house on the west half of lot 19 (the east halflot) because he testified that after leaving the O’Leary house, he went next [door ...]"
- (B_lots3) "[William] White owned the adjoining land to the east, the east half of lot 19. Andreas states that there was a “vacant lot” west ..."; (B_lots7) "this must have been the middle half-lot, the east half of lot 18. These title company records also indicate that ..."
- (B_lots4/5) "vacant, if Daniel Sullivan lived on the west half of lot 19, (the east half-lot) and if Mrs. Sullivan lived [on lot 21 ...]"; "[... Bales's reading of the 1870 census/directory:] that he lived in a house on the west half of lot 19, and that his mother lived in a home on lot 21"; (B_lots8) "one barn and one horse in another barn. If the east half of lot 18 (the middle half-lot) was vacant ..."; "only remaining Sullivan parcel—the west half of lot 18, or the west half-lot. So where was the other barn ..."
- Figure 51 caption (B_fig51, q0092): "FIGURE 51—THE ANNE MURRAY AND PATRICK O’LEARY PROPERTIES, October 8, 1871" (plan with McLaughlin house, DeKoven Street, scale 0–50 feet).

## 3. The sightline argument (Dalton's house)
- (q0050) "testimony, as any buildings that blocked Sullivan’s line of sight were not in existence at the time of the inquiry. Therefore, his claims as to seeing the [fire ...]"
- (B_los2) "[... realize that the Dalton home (and very] likely the Forbes house) would have blocked his line of sight.” Is it possible that Sullivan saw the smoke of the burning barn rising above Dalton’s [house ...]"
- (B_los3) "[Musham locates Walter Forbes’ ...] house on it with exacting accuracy. As depicted, the house clearly blocks Sullivan’s line of sight. Unfortunately, Musham’s reference material ..."
- (B_los4) "height) would have certainly blocked Sullivan’s line of sight (Figure 78).(n)"; figure caption (B_los5): "[... even] a corner of Forbes’s home would have nonetheless obstructed Sullivan’s line of sight. (Diagram by Douglas A. Swanson)"
- (B_dalt1, q0069) "been set back as much as Dalton’s house (and it appears that Dalton’s house might have been set back as much as thirty-seven feet), Andreas would ..."
- (B_dalt2) "Finally, an eight-foot-high fence ran from Dalton’s house to his shed, located at the rear of his property; ..."
- (B_dalt3) "[the barn of] O’Leary, was only fourteen feet in height.(n.10) Dalton’s house was one of the first buildings to be destroyed ..."
- Figure labels (q0054/q0069): "alleged ... view of the barn ... (blocked by Dalton's house) ... Approximate location of ... Sullivan, by a fence, in [front of White's ...]"

## 4. Stated caveats / alternatives
- (B_sull4, q0048 sibling + chaining) "[... if the fire had started in the loft of] the barn and thus first broken through the roof, one might argue that perhaps Sullivan saw the fire above Dalton’s house. However, Sullivan testified that when he entered the barn, the fire had not yet broken through the roof. Sullivan ..."
- (B_sull5) "[... after his ques]tioning before the commissioners and [marshals ... it is] almost certain that Sullivan did not see the fire above Dalton’s house. Sullivan never claimed in ei[ther ...]"
- (B_los2, backward) "[... it is possible] that Sullivan may have simply failed to [notice/realize ...] that the Dalton home (and very likely the Forbes house) would have blocked his line of sight.”
- (B_los1, backward) "[... does not] excuse the fire officials from failing to address the incongruity of Sullivan’s testimony, as any buildings that blocked Sullivan’s line of sight were not in existence at the time of the inquiry."
- (B_sull3) "the fire officials failed to ask Sullivan several things. Sullivan said, for example, that after the fire broke out “everyone made an alarm....” The commissioners and marshals never asked him who “everyone” was so ..." ; "[the officials never asked] Sullivan to explain why he chose to sit [at this particular location.]"

## 5. Timing
- (q0075) "cows kicking over a lighted kerosene lamp between 8:30 and 9:00 P.M. on Sunday, October 8"; (B_830) "inquiry: “If the O’Learys were in bed and asleep at 8:30 P.M. and for the next half hour, they were certainly very good sleepers to sleep through a ..."
- (B_845a/b/c, q0078) "[... per]suasively argues that the fire began as early as 8:45 P.M., it is quite possible that the fire started ..."; "that the fire began much earlier, no later than 8:45 P.M. This evidence consists of the recollections of firemen and “the statements of citizens ..."; "If the fire broke out at about 8:45 P.M. and not at nine-thirty, then what was Schaefer doing for forty-five minutes? Why did ..."; "Did the O’Leary barn ignite as early at 8:45 P.M.?"; "[Dalton] ... at about 8:45 P.M., he heard a woman scream. Dalton maintained ..."

## 6. Why Sullivan might have been in the barn (his mother's cow), Regan
- (B_cow1, q0080) "he used to go to the barn to bring feed to his mother’s cow. Why would he lie about something that could ..."; (B_cow2) "probably did go to the O’Leary barn to feed his mother’s cow—until Catherine Sullivan’s sons bought her ..."
- (q0089) affidavits: "Michael McDermott that was published in the Chicago Tribune on October 20. In this affidavit Sullivan ..."; "earlier claimed in a sworn affidavit that “Denis Ryan” awakened him. This affidavit was published in the Tribune ..."
- App. D [265] (D_dsull_265): "Q. Do you recollect noticing at [265] the right hand as you went in any quantity of shav[ings ...]" (the shavings question).

## 7. Ahern and the earliest printing of the cow story; Louis M. Cohn
- (q0096) "FIGURE 36—MICHAEL AHERN. In 1871 Michael Ahern was a newspaper reporter for the Chicago [Republican ...]"; "And by 1921 Ahern had completely omitted Haynie’s name from the credits. Instead, Ahern now claimed that ..."; "that he authored the article, not Ahern, because “the booze got him [Ahern] many years ago, and he has not ..."; "Patrick O’Leary, claiming that Ahern had always maintained that he (Ahern) and fellow newspapermen Jim [Haynie and John English ...]"
- (q0095) "A Gambler Named Louis M. Cohn — Alan Wykes suggests in his book The Complete [Illustrated Guide to] Gambling (1964) that the fire was caused by one Louis M. Cohn, who knocked over a lantern while playing craps ..."; "FIGURE 58—LOUIS M. COHN. Louis M. Cohn was a Chicago importer and world traveler ..."; "in 1895, people like Jacob John Schaller and Louis M. Cohn—people who were probably in all other respects ..."; "[...] this theory can be rejected.(n)"
- Bales's closing: "No, I have not. I have no smoking gun; there is no longer even a smoking city that might give testimony to what happened on that Sunday evening ..."

(Sections are extended below from the chains as they complete — see chains_dump.md.)

## 8. Appendix B, "Determining the Distance That Sullivan Allegedly Ran to the Barn" (pp. ~197–199) — the arithmetic
Fragments (q0240, q0261, q0349, q0352, q0347, chains B_dist1–6, B_fig54a; App. B running heads "Behind the Conclusions 199"):
- Bales's premise (chain B_parc5/B_parc1, chapter): "in 1871 William White owned two contiguous parcels of land on DeKoven Street, a “west parcel” and an “east parcel.” ... These two adjoining properties ... were each twenty-five feet wide. In front of which one did Sullivan sit? As explained in Appendix B and as illustrated in Figure 54, it was probably the “west parcel.”(n4)"; App. B (B_parc2): "of White’s “west parcel.” The reasons are as follows: • White was deeded the west parcel in 1864. He obtained the adjoining east parcel in 1870. Chicago city directories for the years [...]"; "prior to the time he was deeded the east parcel in 1870. But was he living on the west parcel? Robinson’s Atlas of the City of Chicago depicts [improvements on Chicago properties ...]"; caveat (B_parc4): "[even if] Sullivan sat in front of a fence on White’s east parcel, his view of the barn still would have been obstructed by Dalton’s house."
- The westward leg (q0349): "can be computed as follows: 12½ feet = half the width of the White west parcel / 75 feet = the entire [frontage of the Sullivan property ...]" ... "[+ 2½ feet: the passageway entrance is] presumed to be a point that is two-and-one-half feet west of the O’Leary-Dalton boundary line" (q0245) ... "[as shown] in Figure 54, total 90 feet."
- The street: "the widening of DeKoven Street from 40 feet to 60 feet. Ten feet was acquired from lots on either side" (q0347); "This resulted in a taking of ten feet from the front of what would eventually be the O'Leary [lot]" (q0252); the alley: "appropriating a 15-foot-wide strip of land in Block 38 ... for use as an alley" (q0063).
- The diagonal: "The estimated total distance that Sullivan claimed he ran can now be determined, using the Pythagorean Theorem [√(90² + 60²) ...] or 108.17 feet). Therefore, the approximate total distance that Sullivan allegedly traveled would be: [108.17 feet = the distance ... across DeKoven Street to the] O’Leary passageway across the street / + 84.5 feet = the distance from the entrance of this passageway to the [barn]" (q0261, q0240).
- The passageway leg (q0349): "[100.5 feet = the] length of the O’Leary property − 16.0 feet = the width of the barn = 84.5 feet. Note: Forbes's house is [...]"; (q0240) "assume that Sullivan would have run through this passageway to get to the barn, which was at the rear of [the O'Leary lot]"; "Mrs. O’Leary acknowledged that the passageway was “between the two houses.”"
- Result (q0352, q0237): "Chicago real estate documents reveals that the distance Sullivan allegedly ran was about 193 feet"; "[it does not] seem possible that Sullivan, hampered by his wooden leg, would be able to hobble 193 feet, which is more [than one-half the length of a football field ...]"; (chain B_dist4 continues: "one-half the length of a football [field]"). "An Analysis of Figure 54 — The map shown as Figure 54 depicts the dimensions of the O’Leary property and adjoining parcels" (B_fig54a). Bales gives no seconds/minutes figure for a one-legged man in the fragments recovered (query `seconds`, `"one minute"` found nothing on this).
- Barn dimensions (q0347): "twenty feet long, sixteen feet wide, and fourteen feet high"; 1871 description: "fronting the alley, twenty feet; backing from the alley, sixteen feet.... Seven feet to the top of the lower [story]"; "the barn’s dimensions (sixteen feet wide, twenty feet long, fourteen feet high) are the same as noted by [...]". Comparison figure: "Catharine McLaughlin testified that the distance was about forty feet; the accuracy of this figure [...]" (house to barn).
- Figures: "FIGURE 54—O’LEARY PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA [October 8, 1871]" (referred to from ch. 4 and App. B); "FIGURE 78—DANIEL SULLIVAN’S VIEW OF THE O’LEARY BARN (AS[SUMING ...] was close to DeKoven Street) October 8, 1871", cited just before the "Determining the Distance" heading (so Fig. 78 is on p. ~197–198; Fig. 54 is in ch. 4, near pp. 113–116). "FIGURE 64—THE SOUTH SIDE OF DEKOVEN STREET. Catherine Sullivan [...]" (scale in feet; ch. 4, near p. 122).

## 9. Sullivan's App. D pages and the roof/affidavit point
- Running heads "Selections from the Transcript of the Inquiry (D. Sullivan) 237 / 239 / 241" (q0345): Sullivan's testimony occupies book pp. ~236–242 (TOC: PATRICK O'LEARY 234, then DANIEL SULLIVAN). Fragments beside them: "237 Leary’s barn. I got up and run across"; "239 two months. East of Dalton’s, nearer"; note "241 west of his home at 134 DeKoven Street".
- Roof (q0301/q0303, chain B_roof): "However, Sullivan testified that when he entered the barn, the fire had not yet broken through the roof. Sullivan stated in a sworn affidavit that when he first saw the fire, it had broken through the roof of the barn. Furthermore, it appears that [...]"; App. D (D_dsull_fire): "[the fire was in the lower] portion. Q. What seemed to be on fire? A. I couldn’t tell. I got excited. Q. It was filled with fire? A. It was all smoke and fire and flames [...]".
- Bales's reconstruction (q0225/q0229/q0234/q0311, chains B_hob, B_pipe5, B_sr1–4): "Perhaps Sullivan and Regan left the O’Leary home together at about nine o'clock, walked into the O’Learys’ [barn ...]"; "a few minutes before going home.”(n) While Sullivan and Regan rested in the barn, somehow the fire started. How did it happen? There are a number [of possibilities ...]"; "While inside, he dropped a match or pipe in some hay or wood shavings. The hay or shavings caught fire, and he immediately attempted to extinguish the blaze. The fire [...]"; "[a cow ...] suddenly stretched out his legs as Sullivan hobbled by, causing him to lose his balance and fall. No one knows what really happened in the barn on October 8, 1871, but [... the fire] was not caused by Mrs. O’Leary’s [cow ...]"; "in the final analysis the most damning to Sullivan and Regan. At the time the fire broke out, there was no reason for anyone to believe [...]"; "Perhaps Regan and Sullivan were both visiting the O’Learys. If so, [why] did they leave the O’Leary home to [...]". Confidence wording recovered so far: "scenario is not at all implausible", "probably did go to the O’Leary barn to feed his mother’s cow", "No one knows what really happened", "I have no smoking gun".


---
# Appendix: all recovered Part-B chain texts (verbatim OCR, joined by overlap)
Each block = one chain; "note" = what it is; text is continuous within a block. Blocks are in priority order, not book order.

### B_appB1 — App B start

carrying [on] was in the front of Leary’s house and in McLaughlin’s.”) e Appendix B « Behind the Conclusions [Daniel Sullivan] left the house, and, while on the opposite side of the street, at twenty or twenty-five minutes past 9 o'clock, he saw fire in Leary’s barn.” See “The Great Fire,” Chicago Tribune, 26 November 1871, p. ie Finally, his sworn statement published in the October 20 Tribune is in

### B_appB2 — App B p.199

five-foot alleyway. (Sullivan’s lo- cation is presumed to be a point equidistant from both sides of White’s west parcel, and the Behind the Conclusions 199   middle of the alleyway is presumed to be a point that is two-and-one-half feet west of the O’Leary- Dalton boundary line. See Figure 54.) Like the O'Leary

### B_concl — bullet conclusions

(Figure 54). When one examines Sullivan’s testi- mony through the lens of this diagram, sev- eral startling conclusions are revealed: ¢ Sullivan could not have seen the fire from his position in front of William White’s house, as at least one neigh- boring home blocked his view. Sullivan testified that while in front of White’s house, “I saw a fire in Leary’s barn

### B_copy1 — copyright page

Great Chicago Fire and the Myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow, first published in 2002 by McFarland.   LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATION

### B_copy2 — back cover ISBN

Bales earned the Illinois State Historical Society’s Harry E. Pratt Memorial Award.   McFARLAND ISBN 0-7864-2358-7 Cover art: “The Cause of the Great Chicago Fire Oct cu Bulkeley Compar ® a *. Background imag ™ =A am |

### B_cow1 — mother's cow 1 + mother's cow 2

he claimed that he was not in the O’Leary barn that Sunday, he was telling the truth when he testified that he used to go to the barn to bring feed to his mother’s cow. Why would he lie about ' something that could so easily be verified? He testified that he and his brothers “bought a place” for their mother. Daniel Sullivan probably did go to the O’Learybarn to feed his mother’s cow—until Catherine Sullivan’s sons bought her the house and barn on lot 21 in September of 1870. With two barns in the family, she would be able to keep both her cow and her son’s horses on her own

### B_crumb — section: Testimony Crumbles

even bother to ask Mrs. O’Leary if Mrs. White was still in the area and whether or not she would be available to testify. ° Sullivan’s Testimony Crumbles— He Could Not Have Seen the Fire By utilizing Chicago real estate rec- ords, inquiry testimony, post-fire photo- graphs, and other information from his- torical works on the fire, it is possible to graphically

### B_dalt1 — Dalton set back

the historian is silent as to its lo- cation. It seems at least somewhat plausible that if Forbes’ house had been set back as much as Dalton’s house (and it appears that Dalton’s house might have been set back as much as thirty-seven feet), Andreas would

### B_dalt2 — Dalton fence

Sul- livan’s view (see Appendix B). Finally, an eight-foot-high fence ran from Dalton’s house to his shed, located at the rear of his property; this also may have blocked Sulli- van’s view of the barn.” Had the fire started in the hay loft of 116 The Great Chicago Fire and the Myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow   The Great Chicago Fire and the Myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow by Richard F. Bales FOREWORD BY THOMAS

### B_dist1 — AppB distance sum 84.5

White’s house to the en- trance of the O’Leary passageway across the street + 84.5 feet = the distance from the entrance of this passageway to the front of the O’ Leary barn = 192

### B_dist2 — AppB Figure 54 total 90 feet

in Figure 54, total 90 feet. The estimated total distance that Sullivan claimed he ran can now be determined, using the Pythagorean Theorem (the

### B_dist3 — AppB 108.17 feet total

or 108.17 feet). Therefore, the approximate total distance that Sullivan allegedly traveled would be: 108.17 feet= the distance that

### B_dist4 — 193 feet hobble

seem possible that Sullivan, hampered by his wooden leg, would be able to hobble 193 feet, which is more than one-half the length of a football

### B_dist5 — AppB passageway assumption

assume that Sullivan would have run through this passageway to get to the barn, which was at the rear of the O'Leary property. Indeed, he

### B_dist6 — AppB passageway entrance

the yard [em- phasis added].* The distance from the DeKoven Street en- trance of the passageway that was between the O’Leary/McLaughlin and Dalton homes to the front of the O’Leary barn can be calculated as follows: 100

### B_fig54a — AppB: An Analysis of Figure 54

be inappropriate to round off this distance to 193 feet.” An Analysis of Figure 54 The map shown as Figure 54 depicts the di- mensions of the O’Leary property and adjoin- ing parcels

### B_hob — ch4 reconstruction: hobbled / no one knows

relaxing against the wall of the barn, suddenly stretched out his legs as Sullivan hobbled by, causing him to lose his balance and fall. No one knows what really happened in the barn on October 8, 1871, but the evidence seems clear that the fire was not caused by Mrs. O’Leary’s

### B_loc — ch: Bales on Sullivan's location

slipped out from me, and I went down. I stood up again, and I was so close to the wall, I could hold on to something and made for the door.’ Later in his testimony, Sullivan clari- fied his location, stating that he was sitting on the sidewalk, by a fence “at the head of White’s house or head of his lot.” William White did own land east of Sullivan’s prop- erty; it was across the street, on the south side of DeKoven Street, and southeast of the O’Leary and McLaughlin homes. But in 1871 William White owned not one but two separate tracts of land. These two ad-

### B_los4 — ch: line of sight 4 -> Determining the Distance

(possibly two stories in height) would have certainly blocked Sullivan’s line of sight (Figure 78).° Determining the Distance That Sullivan Allegedly Ran to the Barn The lots in the subdivision in which the O’Learys lived were all originally 50 feet wide and 118 feet deep. The O’Learys lived in Block 38 in this subdivision. As platted, DeKoven Street was forty feet wide. On July 30, 1855, the Common Council of the City of Chicago

### B_lot21 — lot 21 75 feet east

located at the southwest corner of DeKoven and Clinton streets and seventy-five feet east of the west half of lot 19. See Chicago Title Insurance Company records; Figure 63. 10. Mrs. Sullivan is probably

### B_lots4 — lots: if vacant + lots: other barn

half of lot 18 (the middle half-lot) was vacant, if Daniel Sullivan lived on the west half of lot 19, (the east half-lot) and if Mrs. Sullivan lived on lot 21, it is quite possible that one of Daniel Sullivan’s barns was on the only remaining Sullivan parcel—the west half of lot 18, or the west half-lot. So where was the other barn located? Catherine Sullivan testifiedthat “I was in my own basement in the rear part of my own build- ing, and one of my boys was out until it was after eight o’clock

### B_lots5 — lots: lot 21 mother

fire? A. I don't. I didn’t keep account of it. I went and got my horses out. 18 and in another barn on lot 21, that he lived in a house on the west half of lot 19, and that his mother lived in a home on lot 21. (Diagram by Douglas A. Swan- son.) 56. Daniel

### B_lots6 — lots: three half-lots + lots: Mrs Sullivan purchases + lots: where Daniel lived + lots: White east half lot 19 + lots: title company records

the south side of DeKoven Street, almost directly op- posite the O’Leary home. The west half-lot was legally described as the west half of lot 18, the mid- dle halflot was the east half of lot 18, and the half- lot on the east was the west half of lot 19 (Figure 64). She purchased all of lot 18in 1864 and the west half of lot 19 a year later. Sullivan must have lived in a house on thewest half of lot 19 (the east halflot) because he testified that after leaving the O’Leary house, he went next to and east of his home and sat in front of William White’s house, and William White owned the adjoining land to the east, the east half of lot 19. Andreas states that there was a “vacantlot” west of Sullivan’s home; this must have been themiddle half-lot, the east half of lot 18. These title company records also indicate that in September of 1870, Catherine Sullivan acquired another tract of land, lot 21. This lot was also on the south side of DeKoven Street, but seventy- five feet east of where her

### B_parc1 — ch: two contiguous parcels

head of White’s house or head of his lot.” But in 1871 William White owned two contiguous parcels of land on DeKoven Street, a “west parcel” and an “east parcel.” In front of which one did Sul- livan sit?! Chicago real estate records indicate that Sullivan probably

### B_parc2 — AppB: reasons west parcel

Sullivan probably sat in front of White’s “west parcel.” The reasons are as follows: e White was deeded the west parcel in 1864. He obtained the adjoining east parcel in 1870. Chicago city directories for the years —Chicago Tribune, November 26,

### B_parc3 — AppB: Robinson's Atlas

Street) prior to the time he was deeded the east parcel in 1870. But was he living on the west parcel? Robinson’s Atlas of the City of Chicago depicts improvements on Chicago properties; it also includes the addresses

### B_parc4 — AppB: even east parcel obstructed

street. Figure 54 discloses that even if Sullivan sat in front of a fence on White’s east parcel, his view of the barn still would have been obstructed by Dal- ton’s house. Why Walter

### B_parc5 — ch: parcels 25 feet wide

tracts of land. These two ad- joining properties, a “west parcel” and an “east parcel,” were each twenty-five feet wide. In front of which one did Sullivan sit? As explained in Appendix B and as il- lustrated in Figure

### B_pipe4 — light a pipe or cigar

Granted, someone could have been strolling down the alley and stopped inside to light a pipe or cigar. But it appears that although the upper half of the barn door adjoining the alley was open, allowing for the full

### B_pipe5 — ch4: dropped a match or pipe

“milk thieves” mentioned in the previous chapter. While inside, he dropped a match or pipe in some hay or wood shavings. The hay or shavings caught fire, and he immediately attempted to extinguish the blaze. The fire

### B_roof — ch: roof / affidavit contradiction

Sullivan testified that when he en- tered the barn, the fire had not yet broken through the roof. Sullivan stated in a sworn affidavit that when he first saw the fire, it had broken through the roof of the barn. Furthermore, it appears that

### B_sr1 — ch4: scenario Sullivan and Regan

On the other hand, the fol- lowing scenario is not at all implausible:” Perhaps Sullivan and Regan left the O’Leary home together at about nine o'clock, walked into the O’Learys’

### B_sr2 — ch4: rested in the barn

comfortable enough to relax in for a few minutes before going home.”’ While Sullivan and Regan rested in the barn, somehow the fire started. How did it happen? There are a number

### B_sr3 — ch4: most damning

most exonerates Mrs. O'Leary is in the final analysis the most damning to Sullivan and Regan. At the time the fire broke out, there was no reason for anyone to believe

### B_sr4 — ch4: both visiting

mother keeps a cow herself, and I used to go in there and bring feed.” Perhaps Regan and Sullivan were both visiting the O’ Learys. If so, did they leave the O’Leary home to

### B_sull2 — ch: Why did Sullivan do this

of White’s house for as long as twenty or twenty-five minutes, sitting on the side- walk by a fence, which was probably located along the front lot line between DeKoven Street and William White’s property.’ Why did Sullivan do this? Why did Sullivan walk across the street, walk past his own home, and sit in front of White’s house for what may have been almost half an hour? Mr. McLaughlin had played his fiddle during the party that evening, and some historians have suggested that Sulli- van sat in front of White’s home in order to enjoy the music. McLaughlin

### B_taking — taking of ten feet + Block 38 alley

acquired from lots on either side of the street. This resulted in a taking of ten feet from the front of what would eventually be the O'Leary property. On this same day another or- dinance was approved, appropriatinga 15-foot- wide strip of land in Block 38. This land was taken for use as an alley, running through the block in an east-west direction. Seven-and-one- half feet were taken from the rear of the future

### B_dalt3 — fourteen feet height + ch: line of sight 1

it appears that Dalton’s home was at least two stories high, so it was probably taller than the O’ Leary barn which, according to Mr. O’Leary, was only fourteen feet in height.!° i Dalton’s house was one of the first buildings to be destroyed by the fire. It is possible that Forbes’s home also burned down. One mightbe tempted to excuse the fire officials from failing to address the in- congruity of Sullivan’s testimony, as any buildings that blocked Sullivan’s line of sight were not in existence at the time of the inquiry. Therefore, his claims as to see- ing the fire from across the street could not be verified or challenged by the commis- sioners or marshals.!? It is quite likely, though, that on No- vember 25, 1871, the day Sullivan testified, debris from the burned

### B_los2 — ch: line of sight 2 (Forbes house)

pervasive (or non-existent) throughout the area that Sullivan may have simply failed to realize that the Dalton home (and very likely the Forbes house) would have blocked his line of sight.” Is it possible that Sullivan saw the smoke of the burning barn rising above Dalton’s house? If that were the case, then the location and height of these buildings 118 The Great Chicago Fire and the Myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow would be irrelevant. But such a possibility seems unlikely. The 1871 Tribune

### B_los3 — ch: line of sight 3 (Musham)

Walter Forbes’ House Would Have Blocked Sullivan’s View of the Barn H. A. Musham’s monograph includes a di- agram of the O’Leary neighborhood. Musham locates Walter Forbes’ house on it with exacting accuracy. As depicted, the house clearly blocks Sullivan’s line of sight. Unfortunately, Mus- ham’s reference material, now in the Research Center of the Chicago Historical Society, does not indicate the source of his conclusions rela- tive to the location of Forbes’ home. Although Andreas’ History of Chicago contains a diagram of

### B_sull1 — ch: section Sullivan and His Testimony + Peg Leg nickname

cause of the fire. The conclusions drawn from the statements of Daniel Sullivan and Dennis Regan, who were neighbors of the O’Learys, cannot be brushed aside as easily as the claims of Jacob Schaller, Mary Callahan, and Louis Cohn.! riZ —Chicago Tribune, October 20, 1871 Daniel “Peg Leg” Sullivan and His Testimony Daniel “Peg Leg” Sullivan lived across the street from the O’Learys at 134 De- Koven Street. He was nicknamed “Peg Leg” because of his wooden leg. (He apparently lost the originalin a railroad accident.) Lit- tle is known of Sullivan

### B_sull4 — ch: fire above Dalton's house caveat

the Myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow   The Great Chicago Fire and the Myth of Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow the barn and thus first broken through the roof, one might argue that perhaps Sullivan saw the fire above Dalton’s house. How- ever, Sullivan testified that when he en- tered the barn, the fire had not yet broken through the roof. Sullivan stated in a sworn affidavit that when he went into the O’Leary barn, “he found the hay in the loft on fire.” This affidavit was published in the October 20, 1871

### B_sull5 — ch: did not see fire above Dalton's

else, either. These questions and answers are the final statements made during Sullivan’s ques- tioning before the commissioners and mar- shals.'° Nonetheless, it seems almost certain that Sullivan did not see the fire above Dal- ton’s house. Sullivan never claimed in ei- ther the affidavit or his testimony that when he first saw the fire, it had broken through the roof of the barn. Furthermore, it appears that

### B_845a — 8:45 a

Benner, In- quiry, vol. [4], pp. 130-31. Although Andreas per- suasively argues that the fire began as early as 8:45 P.M., it is quite possible that the fire started much later, at about 9:20 P.M. See

### B_845b — 8:45 b

the nine-thirty tocsin.? But in his History of Chicago historian A. T. Andreas provides what initially appears to be compelling proof that the fire began much ear- lier, no later than 8:45 P.M. This evidence con- sists of the recollections of firemen and “the statements of citizens who witnessed the fire in its early stages.” He notes, for example, that Wil- liam Lee claimed that after

### B_845c — 8:45 c Schaefer

happened that Sunday evening, one that potentially de- picts the fire department in a much less favor- able light. If the fire broke out at about 8:45 P.M. and not at nine-thirty, then what was Schae- fer doing for forty-five minutes? Why did he wait for three quarters of an hour before calling down to Brown? Even worse, did the commis- sioners deliberately omit key testimony from their

### B_fig51 — Figure 51 caption

i} | \ | N \ J bi f=} SS ' \ \ \ 1 ' O'Leary \ house \ ' | Murray McLaughlin house house | DeKoven Street 0" 10° 20' 30' 40' 50' scale In feet The Anne Murray and Patrick O'Leary Properties October 8, 1871   FIGURE 51—THE ANNE MURRAY AND PATRICK O’LEARY PROPERTIES October 8, 1871   FIGURE 51—THE ANNE

### B_los5 — fig caption Swanson diagram

it seems equally clear that even if the Forbes house was set back as far as the Dalton house, a corner of Forbes’s home would have nonetheless obstructed Sullivan’s line of sight. (Diagram by Douglas A. Swanson) diminished

### B_mcd1 — McDermott affidavit Sullivan

vol. [1], pp. 254- 55. Like Mrs. O’Leary, Sullivan also gave a sworn statement before Michael McDermott that was published in the Chicago Tribune on October 20. In this affidavit Sullivan attested that he was at the O’Leary home on the night of the fire: “[Daniel

### B_mcd3 — affidavit Denis Ryan

Although O'Leary testified that “Dan Sul- livan” called him out of bed, he had earlier claimed in a sworn affidavit that “Denis Ryan” awakened him. This affidavit was published in the Tribune on October 20, about five weeks before O'Leary testified, and is reprinted in Appendix C. The commissioners never commented on this in- consistency. See “How It Originated,” p. [2]

### B_pipe1 — ashes from pipe (theory)

opinion that someone emptied the ashes from his pipe in the alley in the rear of the cow shed, and this was what started the fire.”’ Despite

### B_sull3 — ch: failed to ask Sullivan

home, and sat down in front of a neighbor’s house. The commissioners and marshals never asked Sullivan to ex- plain why he chose to sit at this particular location.’ In fact, the fire officials failed to ask Sullivan several things. Sullivan said, for example, that after the fire broke out “every- one made an alarm....” The commissioners and marshals never asked him who “every- one” was so that these persons might be interviewed. Also, the transcript of the in- quiry investigation and the Tribune’s sum- mary of the proceedings indicates that Mrs. McLaughlin

### B_wl2 — wooden leg between boards

slipped in the O'Leary barn was because “his wooden leg went between two boards, and he half fell over, catch- ing himself on his sound leg

### B_830 — 8:30 quote

inquiry: “If the O’Learys were in bed and asleep at 8:30 P.M. and for the next half hour, they were certainly very good sleepers to sleep through a party, with fiddling and dancing going

### B_appB3 — App B figure (property plan)

parcel and other lots on DeKoven Street. Because of these ordinances, what ultimately became the O’Leary property was Behind the Conclusions O'Leary bam O'Leary House McLaughlin House BS DeKoven        Note: Forbes's house

### B_smok — smoking gun (conclusion)

No, I have not. I have no smoking gun; there is no longer even a smoking city that might give testimony to what happened on that Sun- day evening. But the evidence that I do have is