Married under mother's maiden name

[David Corn]

I wonder if you have seen this before. In my tree I have a couple that married using the maiden name of the groom’s mother on the certificate. The marriage was at the “parsonage” in the Victorian goldfields in 1882.
A year later the couple had a child and just reverted to using the husbands “proper” name and continued to do so.
It turns out the couple had a child two years before the marriage. There was no birth registration for this child, and I only know about this as the child was noted as “issue” on a birth certificate some ten years later. I guess the earlier child is connected with this, but it’s still not clear to me what this subterfuge was meant to achieve?

[wivenhoe]

Can you identify the people you are researching please....names...locations of BDMs.....dates.

[sparrett]

I wonder if you have seen this before. In my tree I have a couple that married using the maiden name of the groom’s mother on the certificate. The marriage was at the “parsonage” in the Victorian goldfields in 1882.
A year later the couple had a child and just reverted to using the husbands “proper” name and continued to do so.
 

A possibilty here is that the maiden name of the groom's mother was in fact the groom's birth name.
That is to say he was born outside his mothers marriage and therefore registerd in her maiden surname.
She possibly married after his birth  and he took on the name of her husband.  He was actually being quite truthful on the marriage, but reverted to "known as " there after.

Sue

[Dundee]

What names did he give for his parents when he married?

Debra 

[David Corn]

What Sue suggests is possible I suppose. There is a dearth of registrations for this family and no birth registration for the man that married (under either possible name).

On the marriage certificate his parent's names are the same as his name (his mother's maiden name) and his mother's maiden name is shown as another name (perhaps it is her mother's maiden name!). This makes the certificate itself, consistent. 

[sparrett]

Hi David,
Yes. Well.
It is quite probable you could get some useful help if the information you are offering was specific.

There is really no general answer to the query as it stands, but queries where full information of names dates and place is given often get excellent result on this forum.

Let us know if we can help.

Sue

[F1fan]

I wonder if you have seen this before. In my tree I have a couple that married using the maiden name of the groom’s mother on the certificate. The marriage was at the “parsonage” in the Victorian goldfields in 1882.
A year later the couple had a child and just reverted to using the husbands “proper” name and continued to do so.
It turns out the couple had a child two years before the marriage. There was no birth registration for this child, and I only know about this as the child was noted as “issue” on a birth certificate some ten years later. I guess the earlier child is connected with this, but it’s still not clear to me what this subterfuge was meant to achieve?

I have a similar situation in my tree, one of the sons decided to get married using his mothers maiden name ( no trace of the surname on the paternal side ) and then several children registered after the marriage over the years with the ' maiden ' surname but then some change to the fathers surname ( paternal / inherited ) and some remain using the ' maiden ' name.

Would be interesting to know if there had been issues between the son and the father and so ' sided ' with his mothers family - who knows - but makes it interesting to research having to use both variations and then trying to match up if the information found is correct