At first glance, the photograph appears ordinary, even endearing.
Two young girls stand side by side in a Chicago photography studio in 1919. Their arms are gently linked. Their dresses are nearly identical—white fabric, lace collars, puffed sleeves, carefully pressed hems. Behind them, a painted backdrop suggests a peaceful garden scene, a common studio prop meant to convey comfort and stability. The girls smile softly at the camera.
It is the kind of image often described as “charming” in museum catalogs or family albums.
But Margaret Holloway could not stop looking at the shoes.
Margaret had spent nearly two decades working as an archivist at the Chicago Historical Society, cataloging early twentieth-century photographs. Over the years, she had learned to read these images with a trained eye. Studio portraits from this era followed predictable patterns: clothing was staged, poses rehearsed, narratives carefully constructed. The photographs were meant to communicate reassurance, respectability, and success.
This particular image arrived as part of a donation from a South Side estate sale. It was tucked among administrative papers from a now-defunct child welfare organization known as the Illinois Home Finding Association. Margaret initially expected it to be another routine cataloging task.
Then she noticed the footwear.
The girl on the left wore polished leather boots with button fastenings, the kind typically purchased by families with modest but steady means. The boots were well fitted and carefully maintained. The girl on the right wore shoes of a different sort entirely—rough canvas, unevenly stitched, with a sagging toe and layered fabric soles. Margaret recognized them immediately.
They were institutional shoes.
Such shoes were commonly issued in orphanages, detention homes, and charitable institutions. They were practical, inexpensive, and standardized. They were not typically worn by children raised in private households.
Margaret turned the photograph over. In faded handwriting, a caption read: “The Moyer twins placed together. June 1919. Success story for annual report.”
If the girls were twins, Margaret wondered, why did only one wear shoes associated with institutional care?
She placed the photograph under magnification and examined it more closely. The dresses matched, but the smiles did not. The girl in leather boots met the camera with ease. The other smiled more tightly, her gaze slightly off center, her posture stiff. Margaret had seen this expression many times before—in portraits of children photographed under instruction rather than choice.
She removed the cardboard mount and found printed text on its underside bearing the slogan of the Illinois Home Finding Association: “Building Christian families through child placement.” The studio stamp identified the photographer as Lind Holman & Sons, a commercial studio active in Chicago between 1915 and 1923, known for producing portraits for institutions as well as families.
Margaret pulled the Association’s records from the archive.
Founded in 1907, the Illinois Home Finding Association presented itself as a progressive alternative to large orphanages. Its mission was to place children from urban institutions into rural households, where they would supposedly receive moral guidance, education, and care. The organization dissolved quietly in the late 1920s, absorbed into broader state welfare systems.
The photograph, Margaret realized, had been promotional material.
She faced a familiar ethical decision. She could catalog the image as labeled and move on, or she could follow the question the shoes raised.
If these girls were not twins, why had the organization said they were?
Margaret began with public records. Birth registries showed no record of Moyer twins born around 1910 in Cook County. Census data from 1910 and 1920 revealed no matching sibling pair. The name “Moyer” appeared, but never twice in the same household.
Then she found a file for a nine-year-old girl named Lena Moyer.
In May 1919, Lena had been transferred from the Cook County Juvenile Detention Home to the Illinois Home Finding Association. Her mother, Alice Moyer, a garment worker, had been sentenced to the women’s reformatory in Joliet for theft. No siblings were listed.
Lena disappeared from public records after that transfer.
Margaret searched further and identified another child: Dorothy Kowalski, age eight, admitted to the Association in April 1919. Her father had died in an industrial accident. Her mother was hospitalized with tuberculosis. Again, no siblings recorded.
The timing matched the photograph.
The girls were not twins.
They were two unrelated children brought together, dressed alike, and photographed as a pair.
Margaret consulted Dr. Robert Chen, a historian specializing in Progressive Era social welfare. When she showed him the photograph and her findings, he responded carefully.
“These organizations competed for funding,” he explained. “They needed compelling stories. Siblings placed together were appealing to donors. It suggested efficiency, compassion, and success.”
“Would they fabricate sibling relationships?” Margaret asked.
“I’ve seen cases where agencies blurred distinctions,” Chen said. “Especially in promotional materials.”
Margaret’s research led her to a collection of contracts at the Newberry Library titled Agreement for the Temporary Care and Christian Training of a Child. The language was explicit. Families provided food and shelter in exchange for labor. Contracts were renewable and unpaid. Two children placed together meant one household receiving double labor.
Correspondence from the Association confirmed the strategy. In a 1919 letter to donors, the director noted that images of siblings generated stronger financial support. Another memo acknowledged a shortage of actual sibling groups that year.
Yet the “Moyer twins” appeared in June.
The shoes, Chen pointed out, explained the oversight. Dresses could be borrowed or purchased for a photograph. Shoes were harder to disguise. The canvas pair revealed prior institutionalization—something the organization did not consider worth concealing.
Margaret imagined the studio scene. Two girls instructed to link arms. Told to smile. Told who they were supposed to be.
Further records revealed criticism even at the time. Letters from Reverend James Mitchell, a community leader on Chicago’s South Side, accused child placement agencies of targeting poor and immigrant families under the guise of reform. “These children are not orphans,” he wrote. “They are taken because their families lack resources.”
His concerns were largely ignored.
Margaret compiled her findings and proposed an exhibition examining the role of child labor and image-making in Progressive Era reform. The proposal sparked debate. Some worried about donor sensitivities. Others questioned revisiting uncomfortable histories.
“The discomfort is already there,” Margaret argued. “It’s just been framed as sentimentality.”
The exhibition opened the following year under the title Hidden Labor: Children and the Business of Reform in Progressive Era Chicago.
At its center hung the photograph. A magnified inset highlighted the shoes.
Visitors lingered. The room grew quiet. Many noticed the detail immediately once it was pointed out.
Descendants of former wards attended. One woman recognized the story. “My grandmother said they dressed her up and told her to smile,” she said. “She said those pictures never felt like her.”
Margaret traced Lena Moyer’s later life through employment records. She worked as a domestic laborer until her death in 1967. Dorothy Kowalski followed a similar path and died in 1953. Neither escaped the role assigned to them in childhood.
The photograph remains on display.
Two girls in matching dresses. Arms linked. Smiling.
Canvas and leather.
Institutional and borrowed.
Not twins, never twins, but connected by a system that turned children into solutions, labor into charity, and photographs into proof.
The truth had always been there.
It was in the shoes.
Waiting for someone to look closely enough to see it.