Sepia Saturday 287: Picturing the Shape of an Immigrant Family

Last week I introduced the Henschel and Gifford families, likely original owners of an old photo album that came into my possession a few years ago. This week's Sepia Saturday theme image suggests group portraits, and is convenient because I will follow on with the cabinet portrait of an unidentified group of young women that I used last week.


Cabinet portrait of unidentified group of women, c.1889-1893
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
As explained in more detail in the previous article, these young women are as yet unidentified and we can't even be sure who the woman at the centre of the group, marked with an arrow pencilled in the lower margin, might be. What we can say with a fair degree of certainty, due to a pencilled notation on the back of the card mount, is that either Herbert Henry Henschel (1888-1982) or his wife Agnes Hammersley née Gifford (1888-1967) of Cleveland, Ohio ordered an vignetted enlargement of this woman's portrait, probably between 1907 and 1913. It seems likely that the subject of the vignette was Agnes's mother Ellen (Nellie) Gifford née Slater, who emigrated from England to the United States with her husband Frederick (Fred) Thomas Gifford (1862-1932) and infant daughter in February 1893.


Unidentified girl, taken c. 1900-1903
Carte de visite by R. Clarenbernie, 46 Liverpool Rd, Stoke-on-Trent
Images © and collection of Brett Payne
The preponderance of portraits in the album taken by studio photographers in Staffordshire (9) and Derbyshire (10) (see geographical distribution here), even taken after the Gifford family's emigration to Cleveland in 1893, points to the existence of a wider family network, some of whom may have remained in England. There are two further carte de visite portraits in the album which have inscriptions on the reverse, the first of which is clearly handwritten in black ink, "Fred & Nellie." Jones (1994) handily lists the photographer R. Clarenbernie working at this address in Stoke-on-Trent only from 1900 to 1903, providing us with a good date estimate for the portrait of a young girl.


Three unidentified children, taken c. 1898-1901
Carte de visite by Thomas Frost, Victoria Studio, 26½ St Peter's St, Derby
Images © and collection of Brett Payne
The second portrait of three pre-teen children (probably a girl and two younger brothers, judging by their facial similarities) was taken by Derby photographer Thomas Frost, whom I know from my own research was active at that address from c.1896 to 1903. The card format (in particular the words, "late with Gibson & Son") indicate that it was probably used prior to c. 1901, while the clothing (specifically the girl's sleeves and the boys' lace collars) suggest a date of very late 1890s or early 1900s. In this case, the inscription reads, "for Nellie with best wishes."

Although pretty meaningless until the recent discovery of the Henschel-Gifford family connection with the album, these two inscriptions now tell us a great deal, because we can be certain that they were taken in England several years after Fred and Nellie had departed for North America. In other words, they must have been sent to them by family back in the old country, and it appears likely that the subjects were nieces and nephews, in other words children of siblings of either Fred or Nellie Gifford. The existence of both photographs in this album also strongly suggests that the album may at one time have been owned by Fred and Nellie Gifford.


James Gifford (1829-1902) and Ann née Hammersley (1832-1926)
From the Ancestry.com family tree & collection of Frank Bates
So off I went to Ancestry.com to look for Fred and Nellie's respective families, tracing them through census, GRO, parish and other records to build up a detailed picture of their immediate families, and in particular to determine what happen to their parents and siblings. I found several family trees uploaded and made publicly available by others, some of whom are clearly related, which made my job a lot quicker and easier. I am particularly indebted to the research done by Frank Bates of Eastlake, Ohio, who is descended from Fred's sister Elizabeth Matilda Gifford (1869-1952). Of special interest are the photographs of Fred Gifford's parents, James Gifford (1829-1902) and Ann née Hammersley (1832-1926), which I have displayed above.


Ann Gifford née Hammersley, Frank Bates and "Butch," taken c. 1909
Cabinet card by Chesnutt Bros (Lewis H & Andrew J), 318 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, Ohio
From the Ancestry.com family tree & collection of Frank Bates
James Gifford married Ann Hammersley at Stoke-on-Trent in 1853, where they lived and had eight children, four boys and four girls. Their last child Agnes Hammersley Gifford was born in late 1879 and died before her third birthday. All seven of their remaining children married, and six of those couples in due course had children of their own. In the mid-1880s, after most of their children had left home, the Giffords moved to Denbigh, a small town in North Wales. James Gifford died in Denbigh in June 1902, and in 1905 his widow crossed the Atlantic to live with her daughter and son-in-law, which is presumably where the portrait with her grandson and his dog (above) was taken.


Unidentified middle-aged couple, c. 1879-1882
Cabinet card by W.H. Smith of Crickhowell, Breconshire, Wales
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
It didn't take much time to find a portrait in the album depicting a middle-aged couple who look very much like younger versions of James and Ann Gifford. Judging by the tight sleeves of the woman's dress, with a large full puff at the top sitting high on the shoulders, I estimate this portrait to have been taken in the very late 1870s or early 1880s (Blum, 1974). They would have been in their early forties at the time, a few years before they moved permanently to live in Denbigh.


Unidentified middle-aged man, c. 1889-1891
Cabinet card by James Murray, Commerce Street, Longton
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
This portrait, taken roughly a decade later in Longton (Staffordshire), also appears to be of James Gifford, although his hair is by now completely white.


Three unidentified women, c. 1885-1888
Carte de visite by C.F. Wiggins, Imperial Studio, 27 Talbot Rd, Blackpool
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
There is also a carte de visite portrait of one older and two younger women, taken in Blackpool in the mid- to late 1880s. The older woman looks very similar, in both facial features and hairstyle, to the black-and-white portrait of Ann Gifford above. The two younger women in the portrait are most likely her daughters, but which ones? For an answer to this question, it is necessary to widen our view across the whole Gifford family, and this is where it starts to get difficult because of the number of children they had.
- James Gifford (1853-) married Mary Worrall in 1875
- William Edgerton Gifford (1856-1940) married Mary Ann Haywood in 1877
- Frederick Thomas Gifford (1862-1932) married Ellen Slater in 1887
- Mary Ann Gifford (1864-) married Alfred Maiden in 1887
- Charles Gifford (1867-1922) married Jane Grocott in 1892
- Elizabeth Matilda Gifford (1869-1952) married George Bates in 1892
- Cecilia Gifford (1875-1974) married Fred George Ham in 1899


Gifford Geographical Family Tree, Click to enlarge
Image © 2015 Brett Payne
The need to be able to visualize the locations of the various branches of the Gifford family through time has led me to design a novel type of family tree, which attempts provide a graphical solution to a problem that I have experienced many times when attempting to research family photo albums. This is its first airing, and since it is really just a prototype, I'll hope you'll bear with me if there are a few hiccups and inconsistencies. To be able to see the full version image at the same time as reading my explanation, I suggest that readers right click with their mouse button on the image above, choose to "open in a new window," and then adjust the size of the browser windows accordingly so you can see both at the same time, assuming your screen is big enough.

Each column on the chart represents a different Gifford family group, with the "first" generation of James and Ann Gifford on the far left, then the seven children of the second generation, and finally Agnes Gifford & Herbert Henschel, who were in the third generation. The vertical axis represents time, and extends from 1850 to 1960, with the decades marked by horizontal rules.

Individuals are marked on the chart by a series of coloured dots (blue for males, red for females, naturally) connected with lines from their birth date, through marriage (where a male and female line will merge), having children (slightly smaller dots) until their death (marked by a small cross). Underlying the family lines are colour fills representing the locations where they were living at the time, for example pale green for Staffordshire (England), pale purple for Ohio (United States), etc. The key to these colours is at the base of the chart.


Portraits taken in Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, c. 1900-1903 (left)
and Derby, Derbyshire, c. 1898-1901 (right)
Images © and collection of Brett Payne
The intention, therefore, is that if the location and approximate date of a photographic portrait are known, and the age(s) of the subject(s) can be roughly estimated, then the chart can be used to determine which members of the family were living in the right place at the right time, and were the right age, to be candidates for the portrait.

Perhaps readers would like to try their hand at doing this for themselves with the two cartes de visites shown above, to see if (a) the chart works as intended, and (b) whether you come up with the same candidates as I have? In other words, if we assume that these children are daughters and sons of one of Fred Gifford's siblings, which second generation family do they belong to? I'd be very grateful if you'd leave your deductions in the comment box below. If you find the chart too difficult to understand, have some questions or suggestions for improvements, or indeed any other comments, I'd likewise be pleased to hear from you.

Post Script 14 July 2015

These are my interpretations of who the subjects of the two carte de visite portraits might be:

(1) Clarnbernie portrait of girl with a wall-eye
The girls looks to be aged around 8-10 years, which implies a birth date of c. 1890-1895 if my date estimate for the portrait is correct. Three of the second generation Gifford families were living in Staffordshire during this period: James & Mary Gifford, William & Mary Ann Gifford and Charles & Jane Gifford. All three had daughters, but only Charles & Jane had a daughter of the right age. She was Agnes Annie Gifford born in 1892 at Stoke-on-Trent.

(2) Frost portrait of three children
The only family living in Derby around the turn of the century was Alfred and Mary Ann Maiden, who had three children: Florence Amelia Maiden, born in 1890 and therefore aged c. 8-11, Alfred James Maiden, born in 1891 and hence aged c. 7-10, and Harry Maiden, born in 1896 and aged 2-5.

References

Alderman, Mari (2006) Victorian Professional Photographers in Wales, 1850-1925, publ. online by GENUKI.

Blum, Stella (1974) Victorian Fashions & Costumes from Harper's Bazaar, 1867-1898, New York: Dover Publications, 294p.

Harbach, Mike (2014) Staffordshire Photographers Index, publ. online by GENUKI>

Jones, Gillian A. (1994) Professional Photographers in North Staffordshire, 1850-1940, The PhotoHistorian, No. 103 (Winter 1994), Royal Photographic Society Historical Group.

Jones, Gillian A. (nd) Professional Photographers in South Staffordshire, 1850-1940, The PhotoHistorian, No. 105, Royal Photographic Society Historical Group.

Jones, Gillian (2004) Lancashire Professional Photographers, 1840-1940, Watford: PhotoResearch, 203p.

Sepia Saturday 286: The Importance of Deciphering a Hasty Scrawl

I spend lot of time trying to decipher almost illegible scrawls inscribed on the back of old photographs, often the only clue to the subject matter of the image on the front. Quite frequently, it comes down to whether a flick of the pen was the start of a new letter or part of the previous one. There's not much point in dwelling on the matter of whether a little more care could have been taken at the time. You just get on with it and work with what you have.


Six years ago a tattered and threadbare velvet-covered album of family photographs came into my possession, having originally been purchased at a yard sale in eastern Pennsylvania. Jack Armstrong had intended to research it himself, but after several years the almost total lack of any clues left its origins as mysterious as when he bought it.

A number of the portraits in the album had been taken by studios in Derbyshire (England) - hence my interest - but all provenance had been lost, and clues to the identity of the subjects were almost completely non-existent. I subsequently used the album as a photo-archival exercise, with several articles published here on the standard photographing, scanning and documentation procedures that I use for such projects (here, here and here). I also used a photograph from the album as the introductory image for a Sepia Saturday article (SS 170) that I wrote about gamekeepers.


Geographical distribution of photographs (click image to enlarge)
In addition to scanning and documenting the collection, I also did some geographical analysis of the studios at which the portraits were taken. As shown in the pie chart above most of the 55 portraits were taken in the United Kingdom, and of those the majority came from Derbyshire (10) and Staffordshire (9). In the United States the bulk of the portraits were taken in Cleveland, Ohio (8).

My initial analysis suggested, therefore, that the family which owned the album may have emigrated from one of several locations in Staffordshire or Derbyshire to Cleveland, Ohio at some time within the date range of the portraits in the album.


Dates of portrait sittings (click image to enlarge)
N.B. 5-yr moving average of mid-points of date estimates
I then constructed a graph showing the frequency of portrait sittings over time, using five year moving averages of the mid-points of the estimated date ranges. I realise that the logic and methodology of using five-year moving averages to represent date range estimates is a bit dodgy, to say the least, and I have since revised my date estimates for several photos, but I hoped that this would smooth out the graphs and at least give an an overall visual impression of the main periods that the images were taken, which it does fairly well.

The graph (or chart, if you prefer) demonstrates that the US photos start to appear in the early 1880s, while from the early 1890s onwards, the preponderance of UK photos diminishes markedly. To me this suggests an immigration date range from the early 1880s to the early 1890s. It is conceivable that one part of the family immigrated to the US in the early 1880s, while a second part arrived in the early 1890s. This could have been a husband and wife's family arriving at different times, or indeed something far more complicated.


Cabinet portrait of unidentified group of women, c.1889-1893
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
There are very few inscriptions on the photographs, and none at all on the album pages. The only one that appears to offer any immediate clues to the identity of the subjects is on the back of a cabinet portrait of a large group of ten women taken in the very late 1880s or early 1890s by a professional, if somewhat hastily put together, studio. It has been mounted onto a standard cabinet card mount with no photographer's name, although the presence of a royal seal in the scroll work design strongly implies a United Kingdom origin.


Inscription on reverse of cabinet card mount
The text, handwritten in pencil, appears to read as follows:

H.H. Henschel
1223 E 111th St
10 x 12 Sep vig

The first line is almost certainly a name, H.H. Henschel or conceivably "Herschel," and is probably the client's name, not necessarily that of the subject. The second line, I think, comprises an address, (number) 1223 East 111th Street, while the third I have deciphered as instructions for a copy enlargement of the portrait to be made, 10" x 12" Sepia vignette. At the edge of the front of the card mount is a small arrow marked in pen or pencil indicating that the central figure is the one which is to be enlarged.

The surname appears to be of Germanic origin, and the address is in a style more likely to have originated in the United States than in the United Kingdom. I came to the conclusion, therefore, that although the original portrait had been taken somewhere in the UK, the vignetted portrait enlargement was requested by someone who no longer had access to the original studio negatives. In other words, it may have been written, and therefore the enlargement made, some years after the original portrait had been taken. It could have been a simple framed vignette or a much more elaborate glazed and framed, colourised portrait, examples of which I have posted here and, with my Tauranga Historical Society hat on, here.


Census enumeration for 1221 E 111th St, Cleveland City, 23 Apr 1910
Image © The National Archives & courtesy of Ancestry.com
Given that Cleveland, Ohio features so prominently in the US portraits, I searched for the surname "Henschel" in census records for that city. Almost immediately I came up with the following spectacular discovery at 1221 East 111th Street, Cleveland in 1910:

Gifford Frederick / Head / 48 / Widr / b Eng / Imm 1892 / China Artist
Gifford Frederick J / Son / 10 / S / b OH
Henschel Herbert / SoninLaw / 23 / M 2y / b OH / Auto Co. Electrician
Henschel Agnes H / Dau / 22 / M 2y / b Eng
Henschel Herbert G / GdSon / 11m / S / b OH

Here was a family that fitted the bill, having arrived in the United States in 1892, settled in Cleveland, with a daughter who married Herbert Henschel in about 1908, and were living at in East 111th Street in 1910 - although at number 1221 instead of 1223. It seemed almost too good to be true but, as I investigated the family further through census records and the discovery of online family trees, pieces continued to fall into place.


The Henschel family arrived on S.S. Cimbria in 1881
Image courtesy of Ancestry.com
Wilhelm (William) Henschel and his family emigrated from Berlin, Prussia in 1881. After a fifteen day voyage across the North Atlantic on board the Hamburg America Line steamship Cimbria, his wife Wilhelmina (Minnie) and three children arrived in New York on 6 October and joined William in Cleveland, Ohio.


Garfield Monument, Cleveland, Ohio, taken c. May 1890
Cabinet card by unknown photographer
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
Having arrived in the United States only a few weeks after the assassination of President Garfield, whose home town was Cleveland, it was natural that when a monument to him was unveiled at the Lake View Cemetery in Cleveland and dedicated in May 1890, the Henschel family should preserve a keepsake of such an historic occasion in their family album.


Unidentified child in christening gown, c.1889-1892
Cabinet card by J.M. Tuttle, 1672 St Clair St, Cleveland, Ohio
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
In the mean time, the Henschel family had grown. A fourth son William was born in September 1884 and a fifth Herbert Henry Henschel on 24 June 1888, nearly seven years after settling in Cleveland. Their only daughter Mamie arrived in July 1891. This baby in a christening gown could be either Herbert Henry or Mamie.


Unidentified woman, taken c.1891-1892 (click images to enlarge)
Cabinet cards by Rynald H. Krumhar, 225 Superior St, Cleveland, Ohio
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
The two portraits of a middle-aged woman with a very close-fitting hair style and almost as severe an expression were taken by Rynald H. Krumhar who, according to Artists in Ohio, 1787-1900: A Biographical Dictionary, operated a studio in Cleveland on his own in 1891 and 1892 before teaming up with his brother Robert F. Krumhar between 1892 and 1895. Minnie Henschel (1848-) was in her early forties at the time these two portaits were taken, and I believe must be the prime candidate.


Unidentified man, taken c. 1887-1892
Cabinet card by Copeland, 588 Pearl Street, Cleveland, Ohio
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
A head and shoulders vignetted portrait of a similarly aged gentleman with a luxuriant moustache and goatee may have been taken slightly earlier. I don't have dates of operation of the Cleveland photographer Copeland, but from the style of mount, portrait and clothing I suspect it dates to the late 1880s or early 1890s. William Henschel Sr. (1850-) is the obvious choice here, as he too would have been about 40 years old.


Unidentified young man, taken c. 1894-1897
Cabinet card by Pifer & Becker Photo-Palace, Wilshire Building, 94-100 Superior St, Cleveland, Ohio
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
This young man appears to be aged in his late teens, and probably visited Pifer & Becker's Photo-Palace studio in the mid-1890s. I suspect that it is one of Herbert's older brothers, Max, Hugo or Fred, all of whom were born in Germany.



Passenger manifest for S.S. Etruria, arr. New York 27 Feb 1893
On 27 February 1893 Frederick Thomas Gifford (1862-1932) and his wife Ellen arrived at Ellis Island, New York on board the SS Etruria from Liverpool, England with their four year old daughter Agnes Hammersley Gifford (1888-1967), giving Cleveland, Ohio as their destination on the ship's manifest.


Vignette of unidentified woman marked on cabinet card
Frederick Thomas and Ellen Gifford had a son, also named Frederick, born in Cleveland in July 1899. Their daughter Agnes married Herbert Henschel in Hutchinson, Kansas in February 1907. Ellen Gifford died in April 1908 at 1221 East 111st Street, Cleveland, and was buried at Lakeview Cemetery. It was to this same address that the vignetted portrait enlargement - perhaps looking something like the image I created in Photoshop, above - was sent.

We also know that the widowed Fred Gifford, his son and the Henschel family were living there in 1910. By February 1913, when Herbert and Agnes' second child was born, the Henschels had moved to Indiana. It seems a distinct possibility, therefore, that the enlargement is of Agnes's mother Ellen Gifford (1866-1908), and that it was commissioned some time in the five years between her death in April 1908 and their arrival in Indiana in February 1913.


Unidentified child, taken c. 1892-1895
Carte de visite by Krumhar Bros., 225 Superior St, Cleveland, Ohio
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
When this warmly dressed child visited the Krumhar studio on Cleveland's Superior Street both of the Krumhar brothers were in attendance, dating it to between 1892 and 1895. Probably aged between 7 and 9 years old, and I'm guessing a girl because a boy is unlikely to be in a dress at that age, my estimate is that she would have been born circa 1883-1888. I believe this could be be Agnes H. Gifford.


Unidentified group of 2 women & 2 children, taken c. 1892-1895
Sixth-plate tintype (63 x 84mm) by unidentified photographer
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
Inserted within the album are three loose, roughly trimmed sixth-plate tintypes, all taken in studio settings but without any indication of location. The clothing worn by the two women in this group portrait suggests they were taken in the early to mid-1890s, a time when the tintype was far more popular in North America than in England. The woman from the vignette appears seated on the right, wearing a broad-brimmed light-coloured hat, while the child from the Krumhar Bros. portrait is seated at left, also with a very flat hat. Are these two Ellen Gifford and her daughter Agnes? I think so, but then who might the other woman and younger child be?


The Gifford family at 125 Becker Av, Cleveland City, 13 June 1900
The answer to the identity of the other child may lie in the 1900 Census record, which shows the Gifford family living at 125 Becker Avenue, Cleveland. In addition to (Frederick) Thomas, Ellen and Agnes, their ten month-old son Frederick J. is shown as having born in July 1899, probably too late to be the younger child in the tintype portrait. However, from the figures in the columns to the right of her age (Married for 13 years, Mother of 4 children, of which 2 living), we can infer that Ellen had two further children who died young. The younger child could be one of those who died, or alternatively belongs to the other woman who is standing at the back.


Unidentified young man, taken c. 1915-1925
Cabinet card (Carbonette) by Wendel Studio, 13 Avenue A, New York
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
This very smartly dressed young man with a bowtie, fedora and a rose in his buttonhole probably visited the Wendel Studio in New York for a portrait in the late 1920s or early 1920s. He looks to me to be in his late teens, perhaps between 17 and 20 years old, so I estimate that he was born c.1895-1908. The birth date of Frederick J. Gifford (1899-1959) lies well within this range; he married in 1930 and died at Jamestown, New York in November 1959. His father had also died at Jamestown in 1932.


Card mount (114 x 182mm) with no photograph, c.1910-1925
By the Globe Photo Co., 309 Main St., Jamestown, N.Y.
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
My last image for the moment is, in fact, not a photograph at all. This card mount from the Globe Photo Co. studio in Jamestown, New York has lost its contents, so we may never know whose face was framed within it. However I believe that it probably originally contained a postcard format portrait, and the style of mount suggests to me a date of perhaps the 1910s or early 1920s. I found several postcard format portraits from this studio on the web, and they come from a similar era.


I have no doubt that at this point several readers will be thinking that I have amassed a good deal of circumstantial evidence, and may even have indulged in a fair amount of speculation, but have presented little in the way of proof except for the single inscription. To my mind that inscription, and more specifically the juxtaposition of name and address, establishes the connection between that particular portrait and the Henschel-Gifford family without a doubt.

From that point, I agree that I'm on much more shaky ground, but I hope you'll bear with me as I continue to build up a family tree, and attempt to link portraits to individuals within that tree. Part of the difficulty is that one has to not only populate the family tree, but also show that individuals were in the right place at the right time to have their portraits taken. It's a lengthy and time consuming exercise to unravel the complex family relationships, which I'll have to spread over several articles in due course. Next week I'll turn to the English side of the family and look at portraits from Derbyshire and Staffordshire.

Sepia Saturday 276: Barr Brothers and Portland Studios, Nottingham

Inspired by Marilyn's recent post of a newspaper article on Sepia Saturday's Facebook page about the dilemma of whether or not to save photos of unknown relatives, my contribution this week presents a series of cabinet portraits that have been "saved" from the skip, and may yet be identified, thanks to the habits of an early 20th century photographer.

Although certainly not unique (see W.W. Winter and Pollard Graham, both of Derby), it is rare to find a photographer who meticulously recorded the negative number and surname of every customer on the back of each portrait print that he supplied, but the Barr Brothers seemed to have just done that - at least with all 7 examples in my collection.

William Banister Barr was born in 1877, one of eight children of a Liverpool ironmonger. In early 1897 he briefly tried his hand as an apprentice merchant seaman aboard the ship Irby out of Liverpool. He later joined up as a gunner with the Royal Horse Artillery, but by March 1901 was a patient at the Royal Herbert Hospital in Woolwich, adjacent to the artillery barracks, presumably recuperating from some illness, as it appears unlikely he served with the unit in the Anglo-Boer War.


Cabinet card by Barr Bros, Portland Studio, Nottingham & Cardiff, c.1905
inscribed "15786 Dalby" - taken c. 1905-1907
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

In the 1911 census, only two male children with the surname Dalby and appropriate ages are recorded as living in the town of Nottingham: - William Hector Dalby, aged 13, son of Frank John Birch Dalby, a builder's foreman - Samuel Dalby, aged 10, son of Edward Dalby, a builder's labourer Could one of these two be him, I wonder?

In early 1904 he was working as a photographer, with premises at 1 Portland Road, Nottingham. By the time the above cabinet portrait of a young boy in a smart velvet suit was taken around 1905-1907, slightly let down by the studio's scruffy pot plant and rustic chair, it appears his younger brother Harold Cowper Barr (1879-1958) had joined him in the business. The card mount lists a branch studio at 47 Queen Street, Cardiff, which was operating in a building known as City Chambers for several years between 1907 and 1911. Harold was living in Cardiff in April 1911, and had presumably operated the southern arm of the business for some years.


Cabinet card by Portland Studios, Leicester & Nottingham
inscribed "26794 Gregory" - taken c. 1906-1907
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

Unfortunately Gregory was just too common a surname in Leicester and Nottingham (at least 13 of approximately the right age) for me to come up with any decent candidates for this woman.

In July 1905, when William was married at Fairfield, Lancashire, he was living in Birmingham and had studio premises in 52 New Street. He moved to 213 Moseley Road, Aston in 1906 and his first two sons were born there in 1906 and 1907. Within a couple of years, the "Barr Brothers" name was dropped from card mounts, and it simply became known as the Portland Studio, although the stylised ornate "B" monogram remained and they continued the use of their surname in trade listings. In 1908 William moved again, occupying a studio at 46, Imperial Buildings, Dale End.

Some time between 1904 and c.1908 they also briefly operated a studio at 68 Craven Park Road, Harlesden, London N.W.


Cabinet card by Portland Studios, Leicester & Nottingham
inscribed "32708 Tomlinson" - taken c. 1907-1908
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

There were even more candidates for Ms. Tomlinson, so all I can hope for is that someone, someday, will recognise her.

In 1908 a trade directory listed "Barr Bros" with premises at 20 Granby Street, Leicester, but despite the number of examples using the address in my collection it could not have lasted for very long, since by 1909 a photographer named Harry Clare was operating from that address. Of course it is conceivable that Harry Clare had previously been working for the Barr Brothers.


Cabinet card by Portland Studios, Leicester & Nottingham
inscribed "34562 Widdowson" - taken c. 1907-1908
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

The Widdowsons were likewise prolific in Nottinghams and Leicester, making any identification of this slightly older woman difficult, if not impossible, without further information.

The Barr Brothers had established a branch studio at 83a Bold Street, Liverpool as early as 1908, mosing to 103 Smithdown Road the following year. The Nottingham studio appears to have closed in 1908 or early 1909, and by 1910 listings for the Cardiff studio showed the head office of the business, presumably under the hand of William, as being located in Liverpool. William's third son was born at Hoylake, Cheshire in July that year, and by April 1911 the family was living at 107 Smithdown Road, Liverpool. William Barr described himself as a "master photographer" and an employer.


Cabinet card by Portland Studios, Leicester & Nottingham
inscribed "34683 Tomlinson" - taken c. 1907-1908
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

A second portrait of Ms. Tomlinson, a few months after the first, and this time it is full length.

Barr Bros. disappear from sight for the next few years, but the existence of branches in Belfast (109 Donegall Street) and London (132 Dalston Lane, N.E.) is suggested by the addresses on cabinet card mounts deduced to be from the pre-War period. I have also seen a postcard portrait of a merchant seaman, probably pre-War, that is blind stamped, "Portland Studio, 250 High St, S. Tottenham."


Cabinet card by Portland Studios, Leicester & Nottingham
inscribed "34772 Ellis" - taken c. 1907-1908
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

Young Mr Ellis could be any one of a number of candidates.

William Barr enlisted in the army in June 1916, and was called up for service for months later, at which time he gave his occupation as "photographer." Almost forty years of age, he spent the war in England with various units and was finally demobilised in March 1919.


Cabinet card by Portland Studios, Leicester & Nottingham
inscribed "35159 Pack (or Park)" - taken c. 1908-1909
Image © copyright and collection Brett Payne

I found a James Park, aged 21, working as a shoe hand in the Lasting Department of a factory in Leicester, in the 1911 census.

I have no firm evidence that William Barr returned to the photographic profession after the war. He died at Liverpool in 1949.

A list of studios known to have been operated by the Barr Brothers, not necessarily complete, so if you have any further information, please email me.

1904	William Banister Barr, 1 Portland Road, Nottingham
c.1905-1908	Barr Brothers, 1 Portland Road, Nottingham (Portland Studio)
1905-1906	William Banister Barr, 52 New Street, Birmingham
1905	William Banister Barr, 17 Lawrence Hill, Bristol
c. 1906-1907	Barr Brothers, 68 Craven Park Road, Harlesden, London N.W.
1906-1907	William Banister Barr, 213 Moseley Road, Aston, Birmingham
c. 1907-1909	Barr Brothers, 109 Donegall Street, Belfast
c. 1907-1909	Barr Brothers, 138 Dalston Lane, London N.E.
1907-1911	Barr Brothers, City Chambers, 47 Queen Street, Cardiff (Queen Studio)
1908	William Banister Barr, 46 Imperial Buildings, Dale End, Birmingham
1908	Barr Brothers, 20 Granby Street, Leicester
1908	Barr Brothers, 83a Bold Street, Liverpool
1909-1918	Barr Brothers, 103 Smithdown Road, Liverpool
1910	Barr Brothers, 39 (or 33) High Street, Merthyr Tydfil
1910	Barr Brothers, Market St, Llanelly
1910	Barr Brothers, 29 High Street, Newport
1910-1914	Barr Brothers, 79 Taff St, Pontypridd
c.1912-1914	Barr Brothers, 250 High Street, S. Tottenham
1913	Barr Brothers, Regent Street, Wrexham (Queen Studios)
1913	Barr Brothers, 88a Church Street, St Helens

References

Alderman, Mari (2006) Victorian Professional Photographers in Wales, 1850-1925, publ. online by GENUKI

Aston, C.E. John, Hallett, Michael & McKenna, Joseph (1987) Professional Photographers in Birmingham, 1842-1914, Supplement No. 116 to The PhotoHistorian, publ. Royal Photographic Society Historical Group.

Heathcote, Bernard & Heathcote, Pauline (n.d.) Pioneers of Photography in Nottinghamshire, 1841-1910, publ. by Nottinghamshire County Council.

Heathcote, Bernard V. & Heathcote, Pauline F. (n.d.) Leicester Photographic Studios in Victorian & Edwardian Times, publ. Royal Photographic Society Historical Group.

Hicks, Gareth (2003) Glamorgan Photographers (database), publ. online by GENUKI

Holland, Paul (n.d.) Chester & North East Wales Photographers, personal web site.

Jones, Gillian (2004) Lancashire Professional Photographers, 1840-1940, publ. by PhotoResearch.

Vaughan, Roger (2003) Bristol Photographers, 1852-1972, personal web site.

Sepia Saturday 224: The Servants at Quantock Lodge

The Sepia Saturday image prompt this week shows a woman watering her artichokes while a man, presumably her husband, stands with a pipe firmly clenched in his mouth and holding a shovel. He's perhaps pretending that he's just finished the weeding, but is clearly not dressed for the task. My contribution to the meme this week is a group of servants, including gardeners and groundsmen, who may be in their best clothes, but they don't look quite as out of place in the garden.

In something approaching the manner popularised by fellow Sepians Tattered + Lost and Mister Mike, I will attempt a deconstruction and/or reconstruction of the occasion.


Quantock Lodge Servants, 79/August, Cabinet card portrait
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
This early cabinet portrait mounted on plain card was a fortuitous purchase on eBay a few years ago, lucky in that such items often attract furious bidding which very quickly puts them totally out of my reach costwise, but if I remember correctly I was the only one to show any interest in this. It is unusual not only for the subject matter, a large group of servants from a big house, but also that the location and date are written on the card mount.

Quantock Lodge is a mansion built as a holiday residence in the Gothic revival style during the mid-19th century for Henry Labouchere, 1st Baron Taunton (1797-1869), and described by Nocolas Pevsner as "a large rather dull Tudor house ... Gothic Stables, a specially crazy Gothic Dovecote and a big Gothic Lodge." Although Baron Taunton's second wife inherited the estate on his death in 1869, his eldest daughter Mary Dorothy Labouchere (1842-1920) lived there after her marriage in 1872 to Edward James Stanley, D.L., J.P. (1826-1907), later a British Conservative politician from 1882 until 1907. By August 1879, when this photograph was taken, the Stanleys had a son and a daughter, both born at St George Hanover Square, London, and a second son was born on 30th August, also in London.


Cabinet card portrait by Monsieur Bernard's Prince Imperial Photographie Francaise, 8 Alphington St, Exeter
Image © and collection of Brett Payne
Rather than using printed card mount, the photographer has used a small paper label with his details pasted on the back of the card.

MONSIEUR BERNARD'S
PRINCE IMPERIAL
MEMORIAL
Photographie Francaise.
-:o:-
8, Alphington St. EXETER.
Copies may always be had.
No.
I've been unable to find records of a photographer named Bernard working in either Exeter or Somerset. However, there was a Daniel Bernard of Austrian origin living at 12 Smythen Street, Exeter in April 1881 who described himself as picture frame dealer. That he had links with Somerset is demonstrated by the birth of his two children at Bristol in 1875 and 1878. Bernard's use of the name "Prince Imperial Memorial" was particularly opportunisitic, considering that Napoléon, the Prince Imperial, had been killed in Zululand only a couple of months earlier, and the "Prince Imperial Memorial Fund" set up in mid-June.


Detail of Quantock Lodge servants
This group of servants - 10 male, 9 female and a young lad - is large, indicative of a fairly wealthy household, which the Stanleys certainly were. Mary's mother and paternal grandmother were members of the Baring banking family. The census record of Quantock Lodge, Over Stowey, Somerset for 3 April 1881 (p1 & p2), only 20 months after the photograph was taken, shows 21 servants - 8 male, 12 female - as well as a governess and a young boy, with three additonal male employees living in married quarters nearby. In order to compare the census list with the people we see in the photograph, I have extracted their details:

Name	Age	Occupation	1871--1891
Eleanor E. MAJOR	22	Governess
Annie REID	40	Butler's wife (Visitor)
Caroline FARLEY	49	Housekeeper
Emile WELLS	30	Cook
Elise REDFLEUR	31	Ladies Maid [sic]
Mary MAY	25	Nurse	Housekeeper, 1891
Thomas REID	45	Butler
Walter REID	37	Valet
William DAVIS	28	Under Butler
Thomas WALKER	30	Footman
James GRANDFIELD	25	Footman	Under Butler, 1891
Henry WATTS	32	2nd Coachman
James STACEY	23	Groom
George LUCAS	22	House Servant
Mary A. PRICE	26	Kitchen maid
Alice E. TOFFS	19	Kitchen maid
Elizabeth VINCENT	22	House Maid
Gerald A. ELLIS	8	Scholar (Nephew)
Clara PACKER	31	Head Housemaid
Hannah HUTCHINGS	28	Still Room Maid
Elizabeth WALTER	28	2nd Housemaid
Jane HOOPER	19	3rd Housemaid
Caroline THORNE	18	4th Housemaid
William ISTED	39	Head Coachman
Archibald BOUSIE	60	Head Gardener	Head Gardener, 1871
John MARSHALL	56	Head Gamekeeper

The boy was actually Mrs Stanley's nephew, Gerald Arthur Ellis, but I've included him in the extract because he is, rather oddly, listed among the servants. Gerald's father Major-General Sir Arthur Ellis was Equerry to the Prince of Wales, and Gerald himself became a Page to Queen Victoria.


Status and heirarchy of servants in a Victorian house
Image © and courtesy of BBC News Magazine
I can't give an authoritative source for this, but I have the impression that census listings for such households generally show the servants in order of seniority. It is interesting to note that the head gardener had been there since 1871, while two of the servants were still working at Quantock Lodge a decade later in 1891. In those ten years Mary May had worked her way up from Nurse to Housekeeper, while James Grandfield had undergone a similar promotion from Footman to Under Butler.


The Butler and the Housekeeper, Quantock Lodge
The two central figures in this tableaux, also probably the oldest, are almost certainly the most senior male and female servants in the household, the butler and the housekeeper. The butler looks to be in his forties. Thomas Reid was shown as 45 in the 1881 census, but 46 or 47 when he died at Quantock Lodge in February 1884 - depending on source - and is therefore a good candidate. His wife Annie is described as a visitor in the census, and was therefore not a regular member of the household. After her husband's death, she continued to live nearby in Taunton, described in the 1891 Census is "living on her own means."

The housekeeper at Quantock House in April 1881 was Caroline Farley. She gave her age as 49, but I've been able to track her through the remaining census records from 1841 to 1901, and it appears that at the time the photograph was taken in the garden of Quantock Lodge in August 1879, Caroline was probably in her mid-fifties. The housekeeper in the photograph looks a little older than this, perhaps in her sixties, but there are no older women in the census list, so this may be Caroline Farley's predecessor - it's difficult to be sure.


The Valet, Quantock Lodge
Thomas' younger brother Walter Reid was also at Quantock Lodge in 1881, aged 37 and employed as a valet. Judging by his clothing, his age and the similarity of their facial features (in particular ears, nose and mouth), I think he may be standing in the back row, second from right, with his right hand resting with some degree of familiarity on the shoulder of a woman seated on the butler's right, and possibly his left hand on the shoulder of another young woman. Walter was the executor of his brother's will dated April 1884, in which he left a personal estate of £480. I've been unable to find any record of Walter after this date.


The Under Butler and the House Servant, Quantock Lodge
Judging by their clothing, their ages and their proximity in the lineup to the butler, I believe that the two young men standing in the back row, directly in line with the butler and the housekeeper, are probably the Under Butler (right) and male House Servant (left), listed in the 1881 census as William Davis (aged 28) and George Lucas (aged 22). George Lucas was an inmate of the Dorchester Union Workhouse at Fordington in 1871, his mother having died when he was very young.


The Two Footmen and the 2nd Coachman, Quantock Lodge
The double-breasted coats with large brass buttons worn by all three young men standing at the right hand end of the back row makes them likely to have been footmen and coachmen. In 1881 Thomas Walker (30) and James Grandfield (25) were the two footmen, while Henry Watts (32) was the Second Coachman. It is difficult to tell whether that is the order they appear in the photograph.


The Cook and the Head Housemaid, Quantock Lodge
Unfortunately these two are in a part of the photograph which has been overexposed, with a resulting loss of definition. From their clothing, seniority dictated by their position seated to the housekeeper, and their ages, I believe them to be the Cook (left) and the Head Housemaid (right). In 1881, these positions were filled by Emily Wells (30) and Clara Packer (31). I tracked down Emily/Emma Wells to the magnificent Petworth House in Sussex in 1871, where she was employed by the 2nd Lord Leconfield as a Still Room Maid, the most junior servant in the household.


The Governess and the Lady's Maid, Quantock Lodge
There are only two women dressed in dark clothing, both of them fairly young, and they must, I think, be the Governess and Lady's Maid. The young woman seated on the grass at the far left of the group has a substantial hat, and appears to be of an appropriate age to be the 22 year-old Governess, Eleanor E. Major. Ten years later she was working as a Governess to the family of her previous employer's sister, Mina Frances Ellis, and was still employed as a governess in 1901. The woman holding a dog on her lap may be the 31 year-old Elise Reafleur (or Redfleur), the Swiss-born lady's maid to Mary Stanley.


The Nursemaid, Quantock Lodge
Five months prior to the sunny summer morning when Monsieur Bernard visited Quantock Lodge, the Honourable Mrs. Stanley placed an advertisement in the Morning Post, a conservative daily London newspaper "noted for its attentions to the activities of the powerful and wealthy," looking for a "superior Nurserymaid to help in the care of two children (see below). Pregnant with her third child, she was obviously anticipating the extra work load. It would be nice to think that Mary May, the 25 year-old "Nurse" listed in the 1881 Census, who was still with the Stanleys ten years later at Quantock Lodge as housekeeper, came to them in response to this advertisement. My feeling is that she is seated at far left, between the butler and the governess.


Advertisement in the Morning Post, 18 March 1879
In 1898 Mary Ann May married the under-butler James Grandfield and the couple moved to Kensington where James found work, now as a butler. The 1901 Census shows the Stanley household without a butler. James was still working as a butler in London in 1911 and died in 1919, while Mary died in 1939.


The Kitchen and House Maids, Quantock Lodge
The three remaining women in the group, standing immediately behind the butler, housekeeper and cook, look to be in their early to mid-twenties, and could be either kitchen or house staff. Unaccounted for in the census are two kitchen maids, four house maids and a still room maid. Presumably some were either too busy to outdoors engaging in such frivolities as a photographic portrait (read camera-shy), or absent on the day.


The Head Gardener, Quantock Lodge
The man standing at the extreme left of the group may be the Head Gardener, Archibald Bousie, who lived with his family in the gardener's cottage on the estate. He was born on 9 March 1821 at Markinch, Fife, Scotland and, judging by the number of credits in The Flora of Forfarshire by William Gardiner, published in 1848, he was a very knowledgeable and active botanist as a young man. Mr Bousie was employed from c. 1848 by Henry Labouchere, Lord Taunton, as the head gardener in the famous gardens laid out by Capability Brown and Humphry Repton at Stoke Park in Buckinghamshire. He won numerous medals and prizes for his fuschias, rhododendrons, calceolarias, fancy pelargoniums, figs and desert apples in flower and fruit shows at the Crystal Palace, Royal Botanic Society and Royal Horticultural Society between 1855 and 1863.

After Stoke Park was sold in 1863, Bousie moved to Quantock Lodge where he worked in a similar capacity, first for Lord Taunton and later for his daughter and son-in-law, the Stanleys. He died at Over Stowey on 20 December 1910, aged 89 years, after having passed on the reins at Quantock Lodge to his son David Alexander Bousie.


The Head Gamekeeper and the Groom, Quantock Lodge
As we get further down the list, I feel on more shaky ground regarding identifications. The man with a large stick and an even more impressive beard seated on the grass is dressed as an outdoor servant, but I don't believe he can be the Head Coachman, so I think it more likely that he is a gardener or a gamekeeper. The 1881 Census shows one John Marshall, aged 56, Head Gamekeeper, living near Quantock Lodge and it seems likely this is him. The man seated at far right, holding onto a dark-coloured poodle, is probably the groom, shown in the census as James Stacey, aged 23.


The Young Lad, Quantock Lodge
Finally, we have the well dressed young lad sitting cross-legged in front of the housekeeper and the cook. There is only one boy shown in the census, Gerald Ellis, nephew of Mrs Stanley, but in August he would have been only six years old, and this chap looks to me to be around 9 or 10, at least. The Stanley's eldest son Henry Thomas Stanley was a year younger than Gerald, so it's not likely to be him either. I suspect that he was a local lad employed as a Hall Boy.


Quantock Lodge servants
Possible identification of individuals in Quantock Lodge Servants photo:

1. Archibald Bousie, aged 60, Head Gardener
2. Walter Reid, aged 37, Valet
3. Unidentified Kitchen or House Maid
4. George Lucas, aged 22, House Servant
5. Unidentified Kitchen or House Maid
6. William Davis, aged 28, Under Butler
7. Unidentified Kitchen or House Maid
8. James Grandfield, aged 25, Footman
9. Thomas Walker, aged 30, Footman
10. Henry Watts, aged 32, Second Coachman
11. Mary May, aged 25, Nurse(maid)
12. Thomas Reid, 45, Butler
13. Caroline Farley, aged mid-50s, Housekeeper
14. Emily Wells, aged 30, Cook
15. Clara Packer, aged 31, Head Housemaid
16. Elise Reafleur/Redfleur, aged 31, Lady's Maid
17. James Stacey, aged 23, Groom
18. Eleanor E. Major, aged 22, Governess
19. John Marshall, aged 56, Head Gamekeeper
20. Unidentified Hall Boy

Of course I understand that most readers will have decided, probably well before getting to this point, that my IDs are at best tentative, and in the worst case, rather unlikely. My aim at putting this list out in the cybersphere is to generate some interest and possibly further information about the servants who worked, perhaps not straight away, but hopefully in due course.

For more gardening of the sepian variety, I can recommend visiting the other Sepia Saturday contributers.