Clippings: Four Generations Join in Baptismal Ceremony

From The Independent, Northfield, Minnesota, 1909

On last Sunday afternoon four generations in the Richardson family met in a unique and impressive service. A few weeks ago The Independent mentioned the arrival in the city of Rev. G. W. Richardson and daughter, Miss Emma Richardson, from Colorado, who came for a visit with relatives. Mrs. Claude Street and son also came from Montana a short time ago and a week ago last Saturday Mr. and Mrs. Bernard Street and Claude arrived from Deer Lodge Mont., to spend the summer vacation with relatives in this city. This brought together four generations in the Richardson family, and made possible the culmination of a cherished plan conceived by the eldest member of the family.

Last Sunday afternoon the members of the four generations met at the home of Mr. and Mrs. D. F. Richardson, when the sacrament of baptism was administered to his little great-grandsons by Rev. G. W. Richardson. The grandparents on the fathers’ side, Mr. and Mrs. John Street, were also present with the other members of their family, also relatives of the Richardson family, to the number of thirty-three.

Rev. G. W. Richardson spoke earnestly of the touching ceremony, the good old hymn beginning, “Faith of our fathers living still,” was sung by the gathered company, when the venerable great-grandfather administered the sacrament of baptism to Paul Richardson Street, son of Mr. and Mrs. Claude Street, and also to Harold Richardson Street, son of Mr. and Mrs. Bernard Street.

Several days previous members of the four generations interested has gotten together at Mehlin’s studio, where a photograph was taken from one of which The Independent has had the cut made that is shown above.

Four generations of Richardsons

This visit is also recorded by Emma Richardson in her journal:

“Father’s health is good, for his age, but each year he grew frailer… We spent the month of June 1909 visiting at Northfield Minnesota. Ella and Florence, daughters of my brother David had come home for a vacation visit, from Montana; each bringing a fine baby boy. And Father simply had to go see his first great-grandchildren. During this visit, he had the great pleasure of baptizing these precious infants, viz: Paul Richardson Street, and Harold Richardson Street.”

Back to Table of Contents
 

Snapshots: Honolulu

by Jessie Emma Dewey (Cutting), ca. 1899 

Ida and Jessie on the porch - a picture from the same roll

 On the back it reads:

"Gene & I took these snaps - developed the plates & printed them - terrible

Ida -               

At corner of Beretania & Alexander St Honolulu. Cottage built by Chinese contractors - note Chinese architecture. Thot these snapshots might amuse you. I was going to destroy them but will let you do it."

The same intersection in 2016 (via Google Street View)

A Photographic Footnote

by Madge Richardson Walsh, 1985

In the trunk of family papers and mementos which my aunt left me several years ago, there were a dozen “case” photos, or what are loosely called daguerreotypes – portraits on glass, bound in ornate gilt brass frames and set in velvet-lined molded cases. All the pictures had been identified by my schoolteacher great-aunt (bless her!) in her copybook handwriting, and all of them were in excellent condition except one. Its condition was deplorable. It was, of course, the one most interesting to me, since it was a rare and early (1857) family picture including my grandfather and my great-grandfather, the Rev. George Warren Richardson.

According to my great-aunt’s notation, there were supposed to be five people in the picture, but only three could be made out: the dim figures of great-grandfather George, his wife Caroline (Fay), seated, with my grandfather David as a very young child standing by his father’s knee. The head of a fourth figure, that of the nursemaid and housekeeper, was barely discernible in the background; and the fifth figure, of another child, had completely disappeared.

The ambrotype in its deplorable condition

    The other case portraits were of collateral relatives and frustratingly clear – lovely tinted tintypes and glass ambrotypes. Why did the most important one have to be the one in such poor condition? Nevertheless, I copied it along with other family photos; the results were predictably disappointing, and I set it aside as not worth reproducing.

Some time later, I had the opportunity to attend a seminar on the archival care and conservation of photographs. It was conducted by expert Peter Palmquist at the Reading Museum and Art Center, Redding, California. The second day’s session was for family historians; we were to bring examples of what we had, especially problems.

My problem picture was an ambrotype, a successor to the true daguerreotype, but similar in process and appearance. The emulsion is fixed on the glass plate as a negative image. By providing a black background, the viewer sees the image as a positive. Ambrotypes are usually backed by a coating of asphalt or simply black paper. Although there are risks, many times such pictures can be relatively easily restored by using new black paper (acid-free, please – photographic print paper is good). Handling should be kept to a minimum; the brass encasing the glass becomes brittle as it is bent and unbent, and tends to break. There is also the possibility that the whole picture will disintegrate.

The problem with my picture proved to be more difficult. Peter volunteered to take the thing apart, if I was willing; I might lose what little could still be seen. But I felt it was worth the risk, the portrait being unusable as it was (and I did have a copy of it).

So, with all of us holding our breath, Peter carefully pried the packet out of the case, and gently unfolded the brass enclosure. The packet was a sandwich of two pieces of glass, a plain clear one on the bottom, and the glass with a negative image on top with the emulsion side inward. Between them as filling was a scrap of black velvet cloth: here was the reason for the poor quality of the picture – the velvet had crocked, depositing little particles of fuzz all over the emulsion negative.

Peter lifted the glass negative carefully off the velvet and held it up to the light. We could see immediately that the image itself was intact and whole, and all five figures were clearly visible. It was quite a moment, as we all exhaled!

Peter was able to remove the fuzz and make some excellent 8 x 10 prints for me, using the original glass plate negative. From these large prints I can make my own modern negative. This rare portrait of his family and George Richardson himself as a young paterfamilias may eventually grace his autobiography as its frontispiece; and the glass negative is safely back in its brass gilt frame and molded case, wrapped in soft cloth and none the worse for wear.

The same picture, restored