Pride and Prejudice discussion

Can anyone explain the particulars of what an Entailment was when this was written?

Mrs. Bennet says something to the effect that the Collinses can't really appreciate a place that they won't legally own.

Isn't the entailment just that... a promise that when Mr. Bennett dies, the estate goes to Mr. Collins?

Given what I'd heard in Sense and Sensibility I thought that this was just due to Mr. Bennett having only daughters and a law that daughters could not inherit.

Is the term Entailment here similar to the entailment mentioned in To Kill a Mockingbird? I gathered that there it just meant a lawsuit of some sort.

Simple searches on wikipedia and dictionary.com haven't really explained the terms in their historical/legal senses.

Usually it was a legal arrangement designed to keep land/property in the family. It normally excluded females altogether, so if a man did not have a son, the land/property went to the nearest heir in the male line. Perhaps a cousin or a nephew. The land in effect never 'belonged' to the holder, he was merely a life tenant, so he could not dispose of it by will.
Similar arrangements still apply to (most) English hereditary titles, but nowadays the land doesn't necessarily go with them. So someone could be a duke and penniless.

I don't know the precise legal definition, but basically the entailment in Pride and Prejudice means that the Bennet estate must pass down a male line only - a woman could not inherit it, whether in her own right or her husband doing so (if she was married). So, since Mr. Bennet had no sons, his estate would pass onto his nearest male relative (Mr. Collins) upon his death. Mr Bennet, though the owner, had no legal right to sell his property or have any control over the capital of his money. He had only the right to use the interest on his money, and the rent brought in by the estate.

Mr. Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility was in the same situation, though in his case, he had a son - but unfortunately, that son was a jerk who didn't care for his half-sisters and stepmother.

Not all estates were entailed to male heirs - in some cases, women could inherit. In P&P itself, there is the example of Lady Catherine de Bourgh as well as her daughter. But married women could not hold property in their own name - anything they had automatically became their husband's, and remained his even if they got divorced (which was extremely rare in those days, of course).

I'm pretty sure that entailment was a legal thing, and that Mrs. Bennet was just being silly, as usual. The comment about the Collinses not legally owning Longbourne was supposed to be funny, because it shows that Mrs. Bennet has totally misunderstood the entailment :)

Entailments were usually set up at a particular point of time, and bound future generations. The rough modern equivalent would be a 'family trust'. I believe it was possible, legally, to break an entailment in some circumstances, but it certainly required the agreement of both present possessor and his heir, so was not often forthcoming. In medieval days entailed lands were protected from forfeiture for treason, but this was less of an issue in the 18th century. More a matter of 'keeping it in the family' and not completely trusting your heirs to do the 'Right Thing'. they might spend it all on drink and loose women, don't you know.

Leonora wrote: "I'm pretty sure that entailment was a legal thing, and that Mrs. Bennet was just being silly, as usual. The comment about the Collinses not legally owning Longbourne was supposed to be funny, becau..."

Lenora,
Great point. She was a very silly woman when it came to such things. She had a big heart and only wanted the best for her girls as far as monetary gains were concerned (forget love). She might have known what she was talking about for the mere fact of being a woman in the time period and her knowing what restrictions that placed on the female sex. BUT she might not have been aware of the legalities beyond feminine issues. She doesn't seem to concerned with anything beyond her own living state and a marriage for her girls that would advance them in society. Her obsession with their marriages doesn't come from lack of wit though or shallowness. I think it comes from having a life devoid of comforts money can provide and wanting better for her children.
...I just can't decide if she is ridiculous, uneducated in such matters, or sarcastic. Hmmm...

It has been so long since I've read Pride and Prejudice. I've recently re-watched the movie. Could you perhaps tell me what chapter this presents in the book and whether its at the beginning middle or end?
I quite agree with many of the ideas posted of what Entailment meant for the time period. I'm just trying to decide for myself and also figure out whether Mrs. Bennit was being sarcastic or perhaps could actually know the legalities.
Anyway, just curious. :)

It's like in Dwonton, too. There the entailment was the main point of the first series...
(i love downton)...

It seems to me that entailment was a way of protecting the land since generally as a rule women would move to their husbands home once they married. It ensured that the land would not fall into the hands of another family. It's my understanding that if the land was entailed it could not be sold and therefore could not be used as collateral against debts and such.

PostCardashian wrote: "It's like in Dwonton, too. There the entailment was the main point of the first series...
(i love downton)..."

I love Downton too!!!

I've always read Mrs Bennett's comment a bit differently. Been a while since I've read it, so I can't quote it exactly. While, legally, the estate will belong to Mr Collins, there is a moral view that he will be turning her & her children out of their family home when Mr Bennett dies. How can you enjoy something when you've turned someone out of their home with nowhere to go.
None of that makes Mrs Bennett an ounce more likable, imo...

Jasmine wrote: "... Could you perhaps tell me what chapter this presents in the book and whether its at the beginning middle or end?"

It was in chapter 40 (toward the end of the chapter) that Mrs Bennett is bewailing the entailment and speculating that the Collinses are relishing it.

Entailment grew out of the Norman tradition of primogeniture (the eldest son inherits all). Estates were actually held at the leisure of the king and the king could strip a landholder at will. After the Magna Carta was signed in 1215, the barons gained more power as per the king and eventually, there had to be a legal reason for the lands to be declared forfeit to the king. Out of this history of primogeniture, the common law evolved into this type of ownership being "entailed." Land that was not entailed originally could become entailed through a will or a deed. Although it was very rare, property could be entailed on the female line. It could also be entailed on the oldest child regardless of gender. A conveyance instrument (will or deed) could entail property "in perpetua" or forever. I cannot remember exactly when the courts decided this could lead to unconscionable results, but a legal fiction was carved out whereby the entail could be broken. The current holder of the entail had to contract with the heir (who had reached his/her majority) to break the entail.

Though fee tails are normally male, there are fee tails that are female and some that are based on birth order. Generally a person cannot design a will that allows for disposition of property to people who have not been born or for gifts with behavior based limitations. Entailments, or covenants running wiht the land (in other words, they are in the actual deed) defined by gender, birth order, or some other objective standard, are one of the only ways to control real property after the original owners death.

Didn't Lady Catherine say that she was relieved that her husband's estate wasn't entailed, by which I presume she means that she now owns it, or at least has the right to keep living there? Was there some sort of exemption for families at the highest strata of society?

The 'exemption' was a matter of family choice. Land was normally held in fee simple - the equivalent of how land is held today - but families could choose to set up entails which effectively converted it to fee tail.

The exceptions were lands granted in fee tail in the first place, often way back in the middle ages. This would mainly impact on the higher nobility.

When I first read To Kill a Mockingbird, I took Scout's understanding of entailment. She said that Jem said it was when you had your tail in a crack. I took it to mean that it was simply financial hard times. However, as I learned about entailment, I realized that the reason Mr. Cunningham struggled so was due to the entailment of his land. He could not sell his land to have money to live on because it was controlled by the estate.

For the nobility it kept land and title together. So the earl of Bogborough never ended up as a bus driver. Though obviously his female cousins would lose out.