MTFCA Forum

Happy 2021 to all. I am so thankful to have a Model T in my life. (a Duesenburg would be nice too! LOL)
Myself and another person on the forum are curious as to the people in the picture with Henry Ford.
For all intense purposes the car is a 1912....early production or late, it really doesn't matter.
Now Edsel would have been 19 when this picture was taken circa 1912, so the baby isn't Edsel.

No idea, but honestly, Ford's head looks photoshopped into the picture.

John,

It could be useful if you were to attribute the photo. This may assist others to help you in your quest.

From page 32 , Ford Chronicle, 2003, published by Editors of Consumer Guide.

Perhaps the others in the photo will never be known!?! Life goes on.
One possible clue...the passenger walks with a limp.
I looked that one up in the clues closet.
Well I will name them....left to right, Sarah(lady), Jessica(baby), Parker(passenger).

Here is information on the photo including the ID of the passenger and the woman:

http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/17 ... 1309904583

And there you have it....mystery solved!!

AND... The baby's name is Carol.


From the best Ford historian I know, Mike Skinner;

"Jerry – I knew the older gentleman was THE Henry Ford’s uncle, Henry Ford. But I had to look up the other names: Nancy Nutt and her daughter, Carol Nutt."

John,
Thanks for picking up the ball and thanks to all respondents.
Rich J
561 262 0393

Even though the car has been identified as a 1912, that is not necessarily the year the photo was taken. It is possible that the year was 1917, the baby is Henry II, the young woman is Edsel’s wife, and the old lady, her grandmother, for according to Henry Ford’s family tree, the only female relative he had in the age range of the old lady, was an aunt and she did not look like the older woman seated in the T. Jim Patrick

Rich....looks like the ball is back in play.....lol.

RichJ wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:41 am

John,
Thanks for picking up the ball and thanks to all respondents.
Rich J
561 262 0393

As cited in the book, (but obviously not 1910)....