Entailed estate in "Pride & Prej."--Why doesn't the property pass to the male children of the oldest daughter?

Question

In "Pride and Prejudice," the Bennets' house and property is "entailed." Everyone understands that Mr. Collins will inherit upon Mr. Bennet's death. Who would have entailed this property? Why wouldn't it pass to the oldest son of Mr. Bennet's oldest daughter, who in this case would be Jane's oldest son? Thanks for any information.

As some of the answers point out, the Bennet name would not remain on the property when it would pass to Mr. Collins. So the point of the entailment could not have been to keep ownership in the same name.

Answer 1

In the Victorian society Austen lived,men were given precedence over women.
Property passed to the male heirs and the girls only got a certain dowry.Since Mr Bennett has no brothers the property would naturally pass to his cousin.however,this is not done to preserve the family name bur rather to keep the estate on the male side of the family as it would be lost if the girl inherited it.
Also,there is no certainty that Jane will have sons,seeing that thereare only girls in her immediate family.

Hope this helps.I sure was glad to help.

Answer 2

This is the way the crazy laws of inheritance work. I think under normal British law, the estate would descend to the oldest daughter in lieu of a son, but I'm not positive about that. I know in the middle ages, estates usually passed to the oldest son and, lacking sons, the property was equally divided between all daughters - not just the oldest. I'm not sure when (and if) those rules were ever changed.

But the key here is the entailment. One of Mr. Bennet's ancestors decided to sidestep normal procedure for whatever reason and made it legally binding that a female could not inherit. Therefore, lacking sons, the estate passes to the closest male relative. In this case, unfortunately, that's Mr. Collins.

Answer 3

I think Mr. Collins was Mr. Bennet's cousin, so it would probably have been their grandfather whose will included the original entailment.

I'm confused now about the first answer, though, since Mr Collins doesn't have the same name as Mr Bennet! I guess he must be the son of the grandfather (or perhaps great-grandfather) in question's sister--or somehow someone he knew about and considered himself related to more than he knew about Mr. Bennet's daughters and their future children.

Answer 4

The main problem with your idea is that the female takes her husbands name, thus the property would then change into another surname. The whole purpose of entailment is to keep the property in the original name. Also the entailment would have been in place long before the oldest daughter got married and had babies, there is no guarantee that she will get married, have babies and that one of them would be a boy.

Answer 5

An entail was a legal device used to prevent a landed property from being broken up, and/or from descending in a female line.
In the upper and middle class, property and wealth were generally entailed to the oldest son in order to preserve family estates intact.

You can read the whole story of Longbourne entail and inheritance on the page:

http://www.pemberley.com/janeinfo/pptopic2.html#entail

Answer 6

I have read with much interest the answers abour entailment and do agree with the last observation--mr. Collins has a different name..how is that possible?
was he the son of mr bennet sister? is that the point?

Answer 7

The previous answer is absolutely correct. Also, the entailing of estate was a way of keeping land from being split among several heirs - in this case instead of one heir being able to support himself and help other siblings, which was usually the plan, there would be bunch of kids who each inherited a little piece of estate which is no good to a man or beast.

Answer 8

18