Last month I posted this picture and wrote about it with the caption on the back:
William 1854 - 1876: starting in the home office in Montreal and then going to various branches (Cobourg, St. Mary's Waterloo, Goderich) all over Ontario, then to St. John NB, finishing in Chicago 1871-1876 (setting up after the Chicago Fire). He left in 1876 to start an insurance agency in Chicago.
Possibly this Robert Richardson, working in various bank branch offices in Ontario, had a son named Thomas who married Mary Curtis.
Based on starting dates, Robert might have been about 10 years older than William. Could Robert have a son who was married in 1869, possibly born about 1849? That would mean he had a son Thomas born about 4 or 5 years after he started working at a bank. It works age-wise.
Would the paths cross for Robert and William? They didn't seem to work at the same branch of the Bank of Montreal, but possibly they did meet in some professional capacity. The Bank did seem to move folks around a lot, maybe they did have some training at the home office.
Or maybe they were also related as cousins, since I have no information on our William's father, Robert Richardson ancestors or siblings or cousins. As Irish, they did name the eldest son after the paternal grandfather, so possibly Robert Richardson the bank employee was named for the same Robert Richardson who William Richardson's father, Robert Richardson.
Or maybe not -- it is a pretty common name!
Still wondering why my family would have the picture -- after all, photographs then were not like photographs today where you can get multiple copies of different sizes to send to all the relatives for a relatively cheap price. I would expect there to be a reason to have a ambrotype (1855-1865) photograph of someone else's relative in the mid-1800s.
The link to this post is http://genea-adventures.blogspot.com/2015/03/more-on-mary-curtis-and-thomas.html