Genealogy Chat

Hi Charlotte I too would have said that Perks was her name first, then Carter, then Gooch but if the marriage found for you is correct then it proves that there may be exceptions. The only way to find out is to purchase that marriage. Have you managed to find Jane Perks/Carter/Gooch in any census? It might help to determine the sequence of events for you. Lyla

I would suggest that the best way to confirm the names would be to look for her second marriage and buy that certifcate. Presumably you have Mr Gooch's full name on the birth certificate? If you find the marriage certificate then Jane should be listed in her previous married surname but her maiden name will show up as her father's name - she will either be Jane Carter, father's name Perks, or Jane Perks, father's name Carter.

I agree with Ann that 'late' usually refers to the previous married name and 'formerly' to the maiden name; a) because this applies on my great grandmother's birth certificate and b) because logically the previous married name is what she had 'lately' been known as, and the maiden name was what she was 'formerly' known as - ie before the other names.

From Ancestry marriages... George Perkes Year of Registration: 1840 Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun District: Dudley County: Staffordshire, Worcestershire Volume: 18 Page: 376 (click to see others on page) Theres a Jane carter on same page. Send for the marriage cert?

Thank you Ann. You see, For months (working on the 'formerly = maiden name' principle) I couldn't find a marriage between Carter and Perks in all the sites I'm a member of or free BMD's etc... Then, in frustration, I contacted a 'tracer' in the US who now has found a marriage in 1840 between a Jane Carter and George PerkEs (with an E). They seem to be convinced it's the right link (don't know how they won't tell me until next installment) which has made me wonder. I hate this line, but if I give up in the second/third generation, there's no hope is there! Thanks for your reassurance too. CH.

dont use a researcher come on here and ask first

Thanks Valerie. I was always lead to believe that 'formerly something' was the maiden name, but now a professional geneaology tracer service in the US informs me otherwise. Now I'm all in a muddle. :( Thanks for the reassurance. CH.

I would say she started out as Jane Perks married a Carter who maybe died then married a Gooch but I could be wrong.

According to her daughter's birth certificate, my g.g. grandmother called herself 'Jane Gooch late Carter formerly Perks' Jane Gooch would be her last husband's name (i.e. my g. grandmothers father's name was 'Gooch') So which is her mother's maiden name? Carter or Perks? or even, who's her first husband? Would one describe their maiden name in the 1850's as 'late' insted of the modern 'née'? Surely you'd be 'formerly'...? Dunno! confused! Hope someone can help out here! With many thanks. C. Harding