Opinion on likeness of two Richardson women sitting please

[Treetotal]

Just another comparison - this is a later photo of who I think is most likely to be the young woman at the back of the other photo.
I think it is Mabel Richardson b 1996. The baby could be her daughter b1817

The dates are a bit confusing 

Carol

[Ruskie]

Just another comparison - this is a later photo of who I think is most likely to be the young woman at the back of the other photo.
I think it is Mabel Richardson b 1996. The baby could be her daughter b1817

The dates are a bit confusing 

Carol

I noticed that too Carol but put it down to typos.  I assume the dates were meant to be 1896 and 1917.

[Treetotal]

Yes, me too...it did make me smile though as I have done this myself 
Carol

[Ruskie]

Yes, me too...it did make me smile though as I have done this myself 
Carol

Me too, but embarrassingly it is usually the other way round .... for example when filling in a form, writing 1895 instead of 1995. 

I think the ladies are nicely dressed. I have a studio photo of OH’s grandmother dressed similarly with skirt and blouse. The older lady may being wearing a dark coloured dress rather than black.

[Jeffrey]

I think it is Mabel Richardson b 1996. The baby could be her daughter b1817

 
Whoops!
I must admit I keep doing that with dates and often put 18.. instead of 19.. like Carol when filling in forms

But thank you all for the replies. Much appreciated to have different opinions from mine as I feel this is 4 generations of the same family.

I couldn't identify the younger woman at first as, to confuse things more, the photo was found in the photo collection of one of her younger sisters. But am now convinced it is Mabel b1896.

Your replies much appreciated.

Judy