The second section of the Delaware County Biographical Review gives us a great deal of information about Mary’s parents, Stephen Altgelt Rich and his wife, Jane Oliver, though this passage does its best to obscure the Rich family’s lineage.

“He [Stephen Rich] was married May 6, 1869, at the mature age of forty-five, to his cousin, Sarah Rich, a native of New York City, the daughter of Stephen Altgelt Rich and his wife, Jane Oliver, who was born October 22, 1788. These parents were married May 12, 1812, by the Rev. Robert Forrest. Stephen A. Rich died August 29, 1858, and his wife on February 25, 1868. They had ten children, half of whom survive. Charlotte and Rachel are both widows in New York City, the former having married William Patterson, and the latter Mr. Buchan, of the firm [James Buchan & Co., manufacturers of soap and candles]. Jane Rich lives with her sister Sarah on the homestead. Elizabeth Rich is the wife of James Rintoul, of New York City. Sarah Rich married her kinsman, Stephen Rich, as before stated. The five deceased children are as follows: James B. was born on the first day of March, 1813, and died in Alabama, August 12, 1844. Mary Struthers Rich [sic] was born March 18, 1815, and died January 28, 1892. Robert Forrest Rich, born January 3, 1820, died November 11, 1872, in New Jersey. Hannah [Rich] Thomson was born November 19, 1822, and died March 27, 1852 in New York City. Andrew Mather Rich was born December 23, 1823, died August 17, 1826.”

Here the Biographical Review makes a mistake: this Mary—the Mary in this picture—cannot be Mary Struthers Rich: as the child of Stephen Altgelt Rich, her maiden name would have been Mary Rich, her correct married name Mary Rich Struthers, as Hannah Rich’s notation on the back of the picture states.

Mary Rich Struthers married James Struthers, but little else is known about them. Mary appears fleetingly in census records. According to FamilySearch, the genealogical site of the Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-Day Saints [link: www.FamilySearch.com] in the Federal Census of 1880, Mary Struthers is described as the widow of James Struthers living with her daughter Agnes Struthers in Jersey City, Hudson, New Jersey. Note that at least one of the FamilySearch records appears to confuse Mary Rich Struthers with Mary Struthers (later: Robinson), her daughter.

About the photographer: the only information we have about the person who took Mary’s photograph is at the bottom of her picture: he was “Brady, New York”. The first Brady one naturally thinks of is Mathew Brady, the famed Civil War photographer. But how likely is *that*?

John S. Craig’s excellent Daguerreian Registry lists four men by the name of Brady engaged in the photographic enterprises of the day. James Brady was active in Baltimore, Maryland, until 1864. John Brady was the brother of Mathew and might, Craig says, have been involved in New York City in the manufacture of cases for daguerreotypes in the early 1840s. Joseph B Brady is described as “a possible daguerreian, probably in New York City, NY, c. 1853.” The existence of this daguerreian is deduced from a lithograph of Little Cordelia Howard, who played Eva in Uncle Tom's Cabin; the lithograph was based on a photograph by a "Jos. B. Brady," and copyrighted 1853.

The preceding makes us think that, if Mary’s photograph had been taken by this same Joseph B, it would bear the same “Jos. B. Brady” trademark. On the other hand, master photographer Abraham Bogardus, whose pictures appear over and over in Hannah Rich’s album, used a variety of logos over a short period of time. Might not “Jos. B.” have done the same?

But let’s throw caution to the winds for a moment and declare this picture to be by Mathew Brady himself, or one of his associates. Stephen May tells us Brady was hampered by failing eyesight all his life, and did not necessarily make all the exposures himself: many were taken by assistants working under his supervision: he trained them, arranged the poses, and told his assistants when to click the shutter. All this produced “the Brady look.”

A way to prove that the Brady who took Mary Rich Struthers’ picture was *the* Mathew Brady would be to find photographs by all four Bradys, and compare their logos with that on the front of Mary Rich Struthers’ photograph. Note the unusual style of the notation: the word “Brady” is on the far left, followed by a comma and a long blank space, then the words “New York” on the far right.

On the Dickinson College website about Mathew Brady and his photographs there is not only a photograph of Brady himself, but on the card to which the photograph is affixed are the words ”Brady” and a comma on the left, a long blank space, and the city name, “Washington,” on the right. The font, however, is different: an elegant cursive.

For further examination there are many of Mathew Brady’s cartes-de-visite in the Smithsonian’s Portrait Gallery. Most of the cards in The Comprehensive List of Sitters have no visible attribution, but check out the portrait of Abraham Lincoln’s son Tad! On this card the print reads “Brady” in an upright typestyle, with the comma to the left, the space, and then “Washington” to the right. Brady photographed Lincoln and his family a number of times, and Lincoln said that Mathew Brady’s photograph made him president.

There are other pictures by Brady on the National Gallery site; these have the same style of attribution as Mary Rich Struthers’ picture, and varying typestyles: General Hooker, actress Maggie Mitchell, and scientist Joseph Henry.

It seems safe to conclude that Mary Rich Struthers’ picture was, in fact, actually taken by Mathew Brady. As to when it was taken, her ensemble points to sometime during the Civil War.

Mary’s dress bears all the hallmarks of victorian mourning: the fabric is dull, rather than shiny; the collar of her dress—collars were very fashionable during the Civil War—is black, not white. Even extremely high magnification does not reveal the detail of her neck broach, but the sentimentality of the era would have suggested a tiny portrait of her lost loved one. In fact, Mary is probably in “deep mourning,” the 2-year period following the death of a husband during which one was expected to wear black.

Other details confirm a 1861-1865 dating: the hairstyle, parted in the center and severely pulled to the back, the absence of any jewelry other than the broach, the hair covering (indicating a married woman), the fullness of the skirt, and the high waist. The sleeves are unusual: there appear to be fabric bands wound around the tops of the sleeves, and at the cuffs as well. The other unusual detail in this photograph is the mysterious item in her hands. Could it be a tiny purse?

It seems likely that Mary Rich Struthers lost her husband in the same conflict which brought her photographer such fame, and then such calamity. Brady’s graphic images brought home the horror of the Civil War. Stephen May tells us: “[He had] poured $100,000 into equipment, supplies, travel expenses, salaries and other costs involved in documenting the war. Even after he used up all his investments and savings, debts from the great Civil War project continued to plague him.

“After the war, Brady faced increasingly stiff competition and his finances, already precarious, declined. He spent much of the remainder of his life fending off creditors. In 1872 he closed his New York gallery and filed for bankruptcy.

“After his beloved wife, Juliette Handy Brady, died in 1887, advancing age, despondency and heavy drinking eroded Brady's health and reputation.

“Back in New York in 1890, he opened a gallery where the main attraction seemed to be Brady himself, the grand old man of American photography. Severely injured in a street accident from which he never fully recovered, he died penniless in New York in 1896.

"Appropriately, the funeral was financed by New York's Seventh Regiment, of which he was an honorary member. ‘In the end Brady was best loved by the soldiers he immortalized,’ observes Panzer. Brady was buried in Washington's Congressional Cemetery, where his grave can be seen today in what has become an endangered historic site.”

Patricia and Carolyn have attempted to identify all persons in the album and learn more about them through research of various records. If you can help us identify or add further information to this photo, please contact:

-