This could possibly be http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=110477539 -
But... 4/5th of the way down this page: http://www.connorsgenealogy.com/oconnor/nameregistryAtoF.html there is an interesting record... Was Eva married to an O'Conner? (photo 1511).
...and then there is this marriage license application found in the Los Angeles Herald, Volume 37, Number 89, 29 December 1909...
HOENSHEL-BALDWIN—Earl W. Hoenshel. age 24, native of Pennsylvanla, and Eva May Baldwin, age 24, native of Kansas; residents of Los Angeles"
This photo would have been taken between March of 1891 to June of 1899. See my blog post on the photographer, M.H. Stewart here: http://wisteria-dawn.blogspot.com/2014/05/workday-wednesday.html
Pretty little baby.
ReplyDeleteAny guess on the date of this photo? I am assume pre-1900... but post 1880.
ReplyDeleteI would guess 1887 to 1894.
DeleteI can see why you asked...there is an Eva M. Baldwin buried in Ellicottville, but she was born in 1916. That wouldn't work...
DeleteThis could possibly be http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=110477539 -
ReplyDeleteBut... 4/5th of the way down this page: http://www.connorsgenealogy.com/oconnor/nameregistryAtoF.html there is an interesting record... Was Eva married to an O'Conner? (photo 1511).
...and then there is this marriage license application found in the Los Angeles Herald, Volume 37, Number 89, 29 December 1909...
HOENSHEL-BALDWIN—Earl W. Hoenshel. age 24, native of Pennsylvanla, and Eva May Baldwin, age 24, native of Kansas; residents of Los Angeles"
http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d&d=LAH19091229.1.14&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN------
This photo would have been taken between March of 1891 to June of 1899. See my blog post on the photographer, M.H. Stewart here: http://wisteria-dawn.blogspot.com/2014/05/workday-wednesday.html
ReplyDeleteThanks Dawn
Delete