Brooklyn Academy of Music fire of 1903

This year coming up the Brooklyn Academy of Music will celebrate its 150 year anniversary as the oldest arts center in America. In the past of BAM’s history there was a brutal fire that burned down the major institution’s first location. Since it was in 1903 nobody in the present knows what happened in detail. But there are plenty of news articles and archives that can give us reliable information. According to the BAM archive and New York Times article on the fire there are two similar stories with two different vantage points.

The Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) is known as America’s oldest learning arts center as it started in 1864 as it says in BAM: The Complete Works. According to BAM archives, BAM was on Montague Street until November 30th, 1903 when it was lost to a morning fire. The fire started around 8:45am caused by a little explosion within the building startling the staff of BAM while they were in the middle lf taking down the set. The explosion happened near the stage area most likely caused by a gas leak. Stagehands immediately began to alert everyone and ran down Montague Street to sound the fire alarm and alert neighboring buildings and businesses. The streets became flooded with locals and workers trying to save whatever they could from the fire, the streets started filling with furniture and important items. Other stagehands were trying to help out by trying to calm the flames with buckets of water but that wasn’t enough to stop the building from coming to its end. Eventually the whole auditorium was aflame and the roof began to cave in. A fire crew did not arrive until twenty minutes later and by then it was too late. The firemen gave up on saving the BAM building and began trying to preserve the surrounding buildings before the flames could get to them. Three more fire crews arrived after that, even though they had given up on saving the BAM building. They were more focused on putting out the fire to save the other buildings like the saloon that was next door, unfortunately that was a lost cause because it was crushed by the falling debris. When watching a video where they showed the windows of the surrounding buildings shattered because of the heat. The saloon next door of BAM was burned down too as a domino effect. The only remains of the BAM building after the fire got putout were the two large facades.

In the New York Times archives article “Brooklyn Academy of Music in Ruins” there’s an inside perspective of what happened when the fire was caused by electricity from a blown out fuse connecting a big “Welcome” sign. Shortly before the fire men were testing out the wiring for the light that is when a burst of flame ignited the stage spreading to the entire building. Some men ran to warn and evacuate the building while some tried to stop the fire. There as a desperate attempt to stop the flames with a water hose but the fire was too intimidating making the men flee the building before the worst case scenario. At 8:47am the fire was first seen and at 9:06am is when the first fire crew was able to arrive to the scene. There was barely any water pressure coming from the mains and as the firemen would pump but there was barely a stream of water which didn’t go inside the building at all. At the time Hugh McLaughlin, the veteran politician and former fireman was a resident at 163 Remsen Street, he was having dinner with his family when he was interrupted by Supreme Court Justice Almet F. Jenks and clerk John B. Byrne. They tried to warn McLaughlin of the danger of fire with reasoning on why he should leave his home with his family. McLaughlin despite the neighboring flames approaching refused to leave his home and his wife stood by his side. Compromising with McLaughlin’s stubbornness the fire department ran a hose through his house to fight off the flames from the rear of the house. Panic happening all around him McLaughlin kept calm and gave suggestions to the firemen fending off the flames try to make its way through the neighborhood.

Though very similar both the New York Times article and the BAM archive had two different vantage points of what happened during the fire that burned down BAM’s first location on Montague Street. In the BAM archive the story did not include a personal experience from a primary source but was very in depth with detail of the outside perspective as oppose to the New York Times article there was more of the inside perspective. Considering that there was a video to help implement detail into the story of how the firemen were trying to put out the fire but there was not enough water pressure. The video showed the viewer how people were trying to help from the roofs of his buildings. The story of Hugh McLaughlin’s refusal to leave his home during the fire also gave us another outside perspective during the fire except it was blocks away from the BAM location. But still his perspective was nonetheless viable to create a story. In the end both stories were similar to which they both had to do with the BAM fire in 1903 and had outside perspectives.

The different perspectives and vantage points of the BAM fire of 1903 can give the mind freedom of imagery. The details given in both the news article and BAM archive helped viewers to actually visualize the tragic accident as if it was a personal memory. If you read in between to the lines you can find more stories and views of what happened. There are more ways than one to view an article and that was two pointed out to open up mind. The BAM now stands strong as it emerged into an even bigger institution after the incident of the fire on 30 Lafayette Avenue.

Serafin, Steven. BAM: the complete works. New York: Brooklyn Academy of Music, 2011.

New York Times archives. Brooklyn Academy of Music Ruins. New York: The New York Times, 1903

BAMorg. Academy of Music Fire. New York: Brooklyn Academy of Music, 1903

McCarren, Patrick. This Week in BAM History: Burning Down the House. New York: Brooklyn Academy of Music, 2011

 

Project 4 New Draft: Tragedies Collide

The Brooklyn Bridge is the first thing someone might think about Brooklyn, there are various reasons why. When we think of the Brooklyn Bridge all we see are the tangible features that it offers us. The events that occurred while developing the bridge and even after it was built are not visible to us which means many people are not aware of them. Thousands of New York residents cross this bridge every day yet not many would know of controversies that have occurred involving the Brooklyn Bridge. Two distinct stories lie in the death of John A. Roebling and the Stampede of 1883. One story revolves around the architect responsible of the Bridge and his death while the other story revolves a tragedy that could’ve been prevented. These accounts have similarities and differences in which we will analyze.

The man responsible for the Brooklyn Bridge went by the name of John A. Roebling. He planned to make the Bridge the biggest suspension bridge during its time due to new ways of building suspension bridges[1]. After construction began, tragedy soon struck. Roebling, while being the architect was also assisting in building the bridge. He was on site one day taking compass readings on some pilings at a ferry slip. He wasn’t aware when the boat banged into the slip, his foot was violently caught on the pilings[2]. He was rushed to his sons house in Brooklyn Heights, not too far from where the bridge stands today. There the doctors amputated his toes and all seemed to be fine. That was until he passed away three weeks later on due to an illness. The tragedy wouldn’t end here as his son took over the project, his son and various workers died to diseases coming from working at the Bridge. This controversy would spread throughout Brooklyn as it was historical tragedies.

The Bridge was alas opened to the public on May 24, 1883. It took just 6 days for a tragedy to happen. The Bridge, being new was asked to be tested on its endurance by a man by the name of P.T Barnum. He proposed an elephant march along with various animals to promote his circus and at the same time prove to the public that the bridge was safe and stable[3]. He was denied this event but on May 30, 1883, a huge stampede was unleashed. On the day of May 30th, rumors spread throughout the bridge that it was going to collapse. This let out a huge fear on people as they rushed to get off the bridge, trampling people without care as their main goal was to save their own lives. No one trusted the bridge so when those comments where made, a terrible stampede began. In the end, 12 people were trampled and 36 left injured[4]. The scene was terrible and controversy let out because if P.T Barnum would’ve been allowed to do his elephant march, this tragedy could’ve been prevented.

These two accounts are surrounded by death and sorrow as the lives of innocent people were lost. That is what is similar between the death of the man responsible for the Brooklyn Bridge, John A. Roebling and the Stampede of 1883. Another similarity is that both of these events could’ve been prevented. The death of Roebling could’ve been prevented if he would’ve never been out on the work site as he was not a construction worker. The stampede could’ve also been prevented if P.T Barnum would’ve been allowed to perform his elephant march. Let’s move on to what differentiates both of these accounts. The death of Roebling was cause by machinery and unawareness of his surroundings while the deaths of the stampede were cause by human beings trampling others to death. Another difference is the after math, after Roebling died, his son and other workers also died constructing the Brooklyn Bridge while a year after the stampede, P.T Barnum was able to perform his march to prevent such event from happening again[5].

Now history can be defined as an argument on how we interpret the past[6]. This mean that many people view these accounts different as they can be viewed differently. Although both of these stories that revolve around the bridge are tragedies, they are also controversial and occurred through different events. One had a positive aftermath while another resulted in more deaths. They are distinct but also similar at the same time. It can be an example of how history can be found in years after an event occurred no matter how different or indifferent they may seem to be.


[1] “Today in History.” : June 12. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.

[2] “John Augustus Roebling (American Engineer).” Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.

[3] “Ephemeral New York.” Ephemeral New York. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.

[4] “Topics in Chronicling America – Brooklyn Bridge; Fanfare and Fatalities.” Brooklyn Bridge; Fanfare and Fatalities. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.

[5] “Ephemeral New York.” Ephemeral New York. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.

[6] Geoffrey, Zylstra, 2013, New York City College of Technology

Fulton Times—the change of Fulton Street

Fulton Times—the change of Fulton Street
Since I came to New York, I always walked to school, I never take any trains or buses to school, so it is so difficult to me to find the way out of the station and the way to my college. I still remember that was the first day of my school, I took the A train in Fulton Street and stopped at the station at Fulton, Jay street. I thought I lost and never left the Fulton Street in Manhattan, but the train did move in the same direction and pass through a stop. Therefore, I got out of the station and finally I found out where am I?
Brooklyn Fulton Street, the same street name in Manhattan downtown. It is named after Robert Fulton, who owned the monopoly business of steam ferries. In that time, the only way traveled to Manhattan and Brooklyn is by the steam ferries, and these two Fulton Street is where the steam ferries linked with. So as we can see Robert Fulton is the huge character in hundred year ago and his name still remain on today local history.Even thought Fulton’s monopoly steam ferries business is no longer exist now, the monopolistic businese along the Fulton Street still going on;(thesis) and the rent cause and effect the business competition along the street.
The retail business along Fulton Street cannot go without its transportation. From the past century, the road structure has great change and influence the area efficiently. Fulton Street has been a marketplace since early 19th century, for example, the Orpheum Theater between Fulton Street and Flatbush Avenue, “the street is full of pedestrians. A trolley track line was next to the (Orpheum) Theater and an over pass train track as well” (Afo). Today, there are no more train lines and train track, the MTA subway trains and buses replace the streetcars. And it easier for people come to Fulton Street and shop along the street. The great transportation gather the lots of customers to this street, the store owners have more chance to sell their products; however, too much customers give the land lords a opportunity to increase the rent.
From the last century, people are more flavors to the local stores on Fulton Street, like the shops that sell hip-hop fashion, cellphone, sneaker and gold jewelry
 however, in recent years, those local and independent shops are disappeared, since they cannot afford the high rent in that area and the competition with national chain stores. According to article “National Retailers Discover Fulton Street Mall in Brooklyn”, an associate director at Newmark Grubb Knight Frank Retail, Hymie Dweck said, “rent on Fulton Street were always around $150 to $200, but they are pushing past that now” (Julie Satow). For the small retailers this is like putting a feather on a horse whose already carries 999.99 kilograms goods on its back—-push it to fall. The owner of Stellar European Design, Sam Yung Kim said “driving up rents beyond $200 a square foot that may make it impossible for him to remain when his lease comes up for renewal in a year” (Joseph Berger). For the small retailers, rent is one of the important factors that they cannot compete with the national stores.
The disappearance of those local stores make some people worry that Fulton Street will lose the African-American and Caribbean-American customers, since they like the unique style and bright color clothing, which make them show off their figure. On the other hand, “some small stores are pleased with the chains’ arrival. ‘They bring more people in this area and it’s better,’ said Frank Flower, an Egyptian immigrant who owns a hole-in-the-wall shop that sells gold chains and earrings” (Berger, Joseph).
Do the national chain stores joining in Fulton Street really change the whole community? Weiner, deputy director of the Pratt Center for Community Development who also worried about the unbalance between national retailer, local retailer and the independent shops did a survey in 2006, asking the architectural significance of the mall’s buildings, and found out that street is “functioning like a traditional marketplace, where people see people they know and come to network and socialize as well as shop.” Weiner believed Fulton Mall has not lost its character.

Cited Work
Aqbere, Dawuda(Afo), “Vaudeville Project-Orpheum.” What is Vaudeville? The Brooklyn Experience. OpenLAB AT CITY TECH, November 7, 2013. Web. November 20, 2013
Berger, Joseph. “On Fulton Street, Worries about Change.” The New York Times Online 20 September 2013. 20 November 2013.
Satow, Julie. “National Retailer Discover a Brooklyn Mall.” The New York Times Online 28 August 2012. 20 November 2013.

The Connector, The Brooklyn bridge

The Brooklyn Bridge.  One of the most famous landmarks of New York. It extends for 5,989 feet and it is one of the best things in New York. It was the reason why New York became what it is today. The Bridges construction started in 1869 by the man called John Augustus Roebling. It was completed on May 24 1883 and the first day estimate of 250,000 people walked across on the bridge promenade. The bridge connected the two major boroughs of New York city today, The boroughs of Manhattan and Brooklyn. The Bridge was completed but do people today wonder how the construction must have felt like or the how John Augustus Roebling managed to do this. Well that is what I will tell you guys today how the Brooklyn Bridge was built, who built it and how it has helped New York City.

The man who thought of he Bridge is John Augustus Roebling. He was a great pioneer in the design of steel suspension bridges. He was born in Germany in 1806 and migrated to Pennsylvania and tried to be a farmer but could not be successful so he moved to the capital   Harrisburg, where he found work as a civil engineer. He promoted the use of wire cable and established a successful wire-cable factory. He made his name in Bridge construction and in 1867 the legislature approved to of a bridge over the east river of Manhattan and Brooklyn.

However when John was inspecting the site he hurt himself and 17 days later he passed away. Than his son Washington A. Roebling, took over as chief engineer. Roebling had worked with his father on several bridges and had helped design the Brooklyn Bridge.

Out Line

Introduction- The Brooklyn Bridge one of the famous land marks of New York and the one the connects Manhattan and Brooklyn.

Body 1- The Bridge is there but who made it like who designed it , who thought of making the Brooklyn bridge

Body 2- How was the bridge constructed, the ways used to built and the people that did all the work.

Body 3- How the bridge has helped New York City

conclusion- review all the 3 points.

The Significance Of Plymouth Church

 

Plymouth Church was founded in 1847 by 21 New Englanders who wanted a Congregational church that had  a simple order of worship, governed by the congregation. With this Purpose they named Henry Ward Beecher the first pastor of this church. This decision made the church increase its popularity rapidly. This reason is because Henry Ward Beecher stated  from his first sermon he was abolitionist and that he will be the pastor to have a greater possibility to stop slavery. When Plymouth church burned out a new one was rapidly build with a more sophisticated architecture to be able to accommodate Beecher and its people better. Now Plymouth Church has been designated as a historical landmark since 1961 for the impact it had towards the abolitionist movement, and there are around 4,000 adults and schoolchildren that tour Plymouth Church each year.[1]

In 1847 when the church was founded its Location was in Cranberry Street. It was a normal church that had the same amount of seats a ordinary church has. Beecher as a pastor and abolitionist gave speeches on this church but it didn’t have enough space for people to come listen to him preach. Two Years from its foundation the church burned. Even though the fire wasn’t that bad they decided to change its location and to rebuilt it so people were able to still listen to Beecher preach.

The location was moved to Orange Street. It was Designed by architect J.C Wells a founder of the American Institute Of Architects. The Church was Designed to seat 2,800 people. Therefore, it was made so people were able to listen to Rev Beecher preach. Its architecture was unique it looked more like a theatre or a huge auditorium than a church.[2]

 

[1] http://www.plymouthchurch.org/our_history.php

[2] http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2013/04/01/a_building_with_a_mission_brooklyns_plymouth_church.php

Borough Hall

Introduction – Brooklyn Borough Hall building was originally the City Hall of the City of Brooklyn in 1848, before it merged with the City of New York in 1898. It held the mayors office, a courthouse and a jail.

Paragraph 1 – Borough hall was originally designed in 1845 by Gamaliel King. It was completed in 1848 with a greek architectural style. In 1895 the cupola and top floors of the building were destroyed in a fire.

Paragraph 2 – 1900 community wanted to have building destroyed (news paper article)

Paragraph 3 – Comparison between architecture styles. Building appreciation in the past vs now.

Looking Back And Foward At The Brooklyn Bridge

The Brooklyn Bridge is the first thing someone might think about Brooklyn, there are various reasons why. When we think of the Brooklyn Bridge we don’t really think about how the Bridge’s state was before we even glimpsed about it, we just think of how the bridge looks now in the present. All that seems to matter to us is what’s in front of our eyes. What we don’t realize is that the bridges present all depended on its past. The Brooklyn Bridges past and present state have similarities and differences as well. We’ll compare to these accounts and view how much the bridge has changed in over 100 years. It is an account in which we will analyze how the bridge was in the past and how it is now in 2013.

The Brooklyn Bridge was first opened to the public in May of 1883[1]. The Bridge was built to allow transportation between Manhattan and Brooklyn. At this time, the Bridge was brand new and people were skeptical of how sturdy it was. So in 1884, a man by the name of P.T Barnum conducted a march of elephants and various animals to prove that the bridge would not collapse[2]. The bridge at the time was the longest suspension bridge[3]. The bridge was in perfect condition through the late 1800’s as it was brand new and none of the material was yet rotted or old. The design and paint was also beautiful compared to many architectural bridges during the time. The bridge allowed hundreds of people to cross the bridge as it was practically for walking and bicycling. The bridge was also standing alone as it had no views of any other famous places except Manhattan.

Let’s fast forward over 100 years to 2013 and look at the Brooklyn Bridge in the present. The Brooklyn Bridge is now under constructions in some areas and has been improved over the years. Changes to the bridges structures and paint have been made as to prevent rotting and erosion from happening and causing any unneccessary damage[4]. The bridge now has the walking promenade and the roads in which vehicles travel to and from Brooklyn. The era has changed and these changes allow for faster transportation. The bridge has vantage points to very beautiful views that occupy the city of New York such as the Statue of Liberty, Governors Island and the Brooklyn Bride Park. The bridge is walked by over 4,000 people a day and over 120,000 vehicles cross the bridge[5].

Now the past and the present of the Brooklyn Bridge have various similiarities and differences. Some similarities are the length of the bridge remain the same, the architectural design has not change at all. The Bridge still has the walking promenade. Now there have been various differences such as the amount of people that cross the bridge everyday, the paint, the addition of vehicles. More changes include the beautiful views assesible from the bridge and the changes constantly being made to the bridge. Both the past and present are what represent Brooklyn. We fail to see that the bridge had a past that differed from the present view that is available to us today.

Therefore the Brooklyn Bridge had similarities in the accounts of past and present. The comparisons analyzed how the Bridge has changed over its 100 years of existence. The Bridge as we speak is still developing and in many years what we now know as the present will the past. The Bridge changes for the better and provides us with information in which we analyze to see what the past was like in Brooklyn and how the present is.


[1] “Infrastructure.” NYC DOT. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.

[2] “PT Barnum.” Biography of. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.

[3] “Building the Brooklyn Bridge, 1871.” Building the Brooklyn Bridge, 1871. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.

[4] “Infrastructure.” NYC DOT. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.

[5] http://brooklyn.about.com/od/brooklynbridge/f/How-Many-People-Walk-The-Brooklyn-Bridge-Every-Day-How-Many-Bikes-And-Cars.htm

Test of Time

Test of Time 1

“History is written by the victors.” as said by Winston Churchill however it is also written by those who survive when there are no winners only the ones remaining. Such as the case of the Brooklyn Theater Fire, however even with 700 survivors and everyone nearby the history of the Brooklyn Theater Fire has gotten lost in history. Few known of this tragic event and there is not even a sign at the location to this day. An event that took the lives of 300 in 1879 passes unnoticed today. History may be written by the victor however it is remembered or forgotten by others.

The melodrama, “The Two Orphans” was playing on the stage of the Brooklyn theatre on December 5, 1876 with a full house in attendance. Over a thousand people were packed inside with most of them in the upper gallery seats, comprised of families and large groups of people that came to see the show. At 11:15 PM, shortly after the opening of the last act, a fire broke out, however it’s danger was downplayed by the leading actor Murdock and few to none left their seats. A the flames grew more visible panic ensued and one thousand people rushed to the only two exits in the rear of the Theater. The top tier had no direct way down and major jam developed on the second tier staircase. This led to trampling and falls, while the upper tier died of asphyxiation and falling debris.

Years after the fire Kate Claxton recalled and told her story to the Philadelphia Times which later reach the home of the Brooklyn Theater Fire, New York and The Times.

Test of Time 2

Winston Churchill said “History is written by the victors.” however it is also true that it is written by those who survive and remembered by them . Such is the case of the Brooklyn Theater Fire: however, even with 700 survivors and bystanders the history of the Brooklyn Theater Fire has gotten lost in history. Few know of this tragic event, and to this day there is not even a sign at the location. An event that took the lives of 300 in 1876 passes unnoticed today.
The melodrama, “The Two Orphans” was playing on the stage of the Brooklyn theatre on December 5, 1876 with a full house in attendance. Over a thousand people were packed inside with most of them in the upper gallery seats, comprised of families and large groups of people that came to see the show. At 11:15 PM, shortly after the opening of the last act, a fire broke out, however its danger was downplayed by the leading actor Murdock, and few to none left their seats. A the flames grew more visible panic ensued and one thousand people rushed to the only two exits in the rear of the Theater. The top tier had no direct way down and a major jam developed on the second tier staircase. This led to trampling and falls, while the upper tier died of asphyxiation and falling debris. This is the official story that is validated by historical records found at the Brooklyn Historical Society and “This Day in History” on history.com.

9 Years after the fire Kate Claxton recalled and told her story to the Philadelphia Times which later reach the home of the Brooklyn Theater Fire, New York and The Times. She recalled how the stage was set up and her laying down in character on straw for the play. She went on to say that she “was startled by a rumbling noise, which sounded as if the ceiling of the the theatre was falling”. Then the curtain rose and she did not dwell on the noise and remained in character. Then as she said her lines and the play progressed she heard the voice of Lilian Cleaves who said “Save yourself for God’s sake: I am running now”. This news made Kate Claxton gaze up and spot the sparks and “little tongues of fire licking the edges of the drops and borders that hung in the flies”. Nevertheless she played her part and did not show fear, same as Harry Murdoch and Mrs. Farren followed by Mr. J. B. Studley. However ; Mrs. Farren whispered to her “The fire is steadily gaining”. At this time the fire could no longer be “concealed from the audience” as the sparks were falling on stage and yet they played on. Panic had taken full swing and only then did ‘we saw that it was useless to attempt to proceed”. In spite of this Mr. Studley said to the people “ The play will go on and the fire will be put out. be quiet, Get back to your seats.”. Kate Claxton then saw that “It was madness to delay longer as we were now almost surrounded by flames”. She went and took Mr. Murdoch by the arm to run but he pulled away in a daze and went to his dressing room where he and Claude Burroughs parished. At this time all of the exits were engulfed in flames and all seemed lost. However: it was at this time that Kate Claxton remembered of a subterranean passage built by Mrs. Conway to the box office from the star dressing room. This was Kate Claxton’s dressing room and she took her neubourg Maude Harrison with her through the tunnel and to the box office. After breaking through the door in the office they were safely outside.

This two accounts of December 5, 1876 during the Brooklyn Theater Fire have the same beginning and end, however; the details and view of events vire. First is a very basic overview of the causes and effects of the Brooklyn Theater Fire told after it had come to pass by historical archives. Kate Claxton was in the middle of all of these events when they transpired and so it is more personal. There are a great deal of details that give us a clear understanding of her position and feelings at that time. On of them being her guilt over the fact that she went along with what everyone else was doing, covering up the truth from the audience. “The curtain should have been kept down until the flames had been extinguished or if it had been found impossible
 the audience should have been calmly informed that
 some unfortunate occurrence behind the scenery compiled a suspension of the performance
.Raising the curtain created a draft which fanned the flames into fury.” There is no such notion in the historical database, no looking back at the event in an other way and no only what happened. Only what happened and remained after being revised at least 3 times and going through countless censers.

The Brooklyn Theater Fire is written in various historical archives ranging from the Brooklyn Historical Society to the New York Times. Nevertheless what is written in one may be found wanting in the other. Kate Claxton first hand account throws into question the legitimes of the Brooklyn Historical Society and “This Day in History”.

Robert, S. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://brooklynhistory.org/library/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/arms_1977_049_theatre.pdf

(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/hundreds-die-in-brooklyn-theater-fire

Montrose, M. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2010/06/walkabout-the-b-2/

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50D11FD355A1A738DDDA90B94D9415B8584F0D3

http://www.green-wood.com/2011/the-two-orphans-with-a-new-home/

Robert, S. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://brooklynhistory.org/library/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/arms_1977_049_theatre.pdf

(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/hundreds-die-in-brooklyn-theater-fire

Montrose, M. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2010/06/walkabout-the-b-2/

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50D11FD355A1A738DDDA90B94D9415B8584F0D3