-- BeckyPrebble - 21 Oct 2008

How was it that the common recovery was so effective? From today's perspective (which I realize is entirely the wrong way to look at it), it looks like a kind of fraud on Mr Collins (I am going with P&P names because I'm not sure what the actual name for Mr Collins would be. He can't be an heir if Mr Bennet is still alive, right?). So like we said in class, if Mr Collins shows up halfway through the transaction, he can stop it. But why can't it be unwound if Mr Collins shows up five years later?

The Court Crier of course has given a warrant, but what is it that makes that warrant stronger than Mr Collins's right right to the entail? Was there even a concept of fraud, or abuse of process, at this time?