Here are two more baby pictures: one of a subject I am aware of, one who remains a mystery. Though I’ve obtained them from a collection of photos generally well-labeled, these two say precious little about their subjects.
Both of these photographs are from the collection on loan to me from Edna Tully McCaughey’s family, so they both supposedly sport subjects related to that line. Or do they?
The first one is labeled “Margaret Tully at the age of 3.” Smiling babies make me happy, too, and this little Margaret seems to have such a cheery disposition. However, just knowing that she could be one of several possible Margaret Tullys does cause my brow to furrow a bit. But only a bit. I am hoping that this Tully family, as they did for their other children’s baby pictures, likes to keep these remembrances on hand. The photographer, at least, remains the same as that of some other family pictures—though the insignia for C. W. Lindner on Commercial Avenue in Chicago is certainly less ornate than the others I’ve seen on subsequent portraits.
As much as I know about this Margaret Tully, I don’t know about the subject of the next photograph. Though it bears the legend, “Edward at 6 mo.,” on the reverse, I have yet to find any baby Edward among this Tully family’s relatives. I’ve looked at the related lines for Edna’s aunts on her Sullivan side, and also among the Tully relatives for Edna’s father, William. No Edward.
The photograph was taken at a Chicago studio. The company’s inscription is hard to read, and appears to be Siegel (or Liegel) Cooper. There are no other photographs in this collection bearing that insignia that I’ve found so far, which makes me wonder if this is the only picture sent from this family to Edna’s parents. This may be a mystery that remains unsolved. And yet, in searching for the answer on this one, I’ve found the answer to another riddle.
But I’ll leave that one for another day.