Archiver > OLD-ENGLISH > 2004-10 > 1098666038

From: "Sandra Lovegrove" <>
Subject: Entails 'n stuff
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:03:55 +0100
References: <bnlQ$MAYX9eBFw+3@varneys.demon.co.uk>

A couple of comments on recent contributions:

(1) Mr.Collins in 'Pride and Prejudice' would have been the next
eligible beneficiary under a "tail male" entail: the most common sort
of arrangement.

(2) Since early times it was possible for the current beneficiary
under a "strict settlement" and his next entitled heir to act together
to "bar the entail". Following the Settled Land Act 1925 it remained
possible to set up a settlement limited effectively to 2 generations.
Entailed settlements were not fully abolished until the Trusts of Land
and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996.

(3) The Duke of Marlborough did not invoke the Settled Lane Act but,
in a highly unusual move, applied to the High Court to vary the terms
of the family trust so as to pass over his oldest son in order to
preserve the estate, i.e. by getting the court to declare that the
Marquis of Blandford was unfit and incapable of managing his affairs
properly such that he would be likely to commit "waste", i.e. fritter
away the trust property. Jamie Blandford therefore will eventually
inherit the title of Duke of Marlborough, but has been effectively
disinherited by being passed over in favour of his younger
half-brother financially.


Researching LOVEGROVEs in all places and at all times.
Please do visit the LOVEGROVE Information Centre on

This thread: