The two most famous statements of the rule in Shelley's Case are those by Preston and Kent which were as follows: a recovery with single voucher, see Fearn. Post. Works, p. 336; if against the tenant of the freehold, and he vouch over the tenant in tail, and the tenant in tail vouch over the common vouchee, it is called a recovery with double voucher; and so on, according to the number of persons vouched. And when an intail is to be barred, it is always proper, for the reasons before mentioned, to suffer a recovery with a double voucher. Watk. Conv., 134. Such a recovery, in which the tenant in tail is vouched, and is vouched over, will not only bar an actual estate tail, of which he is seised, but it will bar all estates tail which have been devested, discontinued, or previously aliened. Salk., 571; Brook. Tail, pl. 32. And it may bar several estates tail, or the right to several estates tail, by one and the same operation. Bax-ton vs. Lever, Cro. Eliz., 388, 1 Ves., 253. It will also bar all remainders and reversions expectant thereon, even though the estate tail has been previously barred by a fine with proclamations levied by the tenant in tail. Sheffield vs. Rat-cliffe, 2 Rol. Rep., 418. And the better opinion seems to be, that a recovery suffered by the issue in tail after the death of the ancestor, and after a fine with proclamations levied by the ancestor, which has effectually barred the estate tail, will bar all remainders and reversions, which are, or were expectant on the estates tail. Fearn. Post. Works, 442; 1

Prest. Conv., 126; 1 Prest. Abst., 394, 395. With respect to the effect of a recovery, it may be further observed, that the recoverer, generally speaking, gains a clear and absolute fee in the premises recovered. But where the person by whom the estate tail was created, had a determinable or defeasible fee, the recovery cannot do more than acquire the ownership for the whole of that determinable or qualified fee. 1 Prest. Conv., 141. And when a tenant of a remote estate tail suffers a common recovery, in which he is vouched, and vouches over, the effect of this recovery will be merely to bar his own estate tail, and the remainders and reversions expectant thereon (3 Co., 6, 8 T. R., 10), and all conditions and collateral limitations annexed to his estate; it will not affect prior estates tail, or any other prior estates. Smith vs. Clifford, 1 T. R., 738. And the fee acquired by such recovery may be barred by a recovery afterwards suffered by the tenant of a prior estate tail. 1 Prest. Abst., 394. So when the entail is of a subject which has a limited duration, as a rent-charge, created de novo, and limited for an estate tail, without any remainders over, the recovery of tenant in tail cannot enlarge the estate beyond the period prescribed for its duration. I Prest. Conv., 140; Ante, vol. 1, p. 448 (n. f). It is also observable, that the estate recovered is not subject to any charges "In any instrument, if the freehold be limited to the ancestor for life, and the inheritance to his heirs, either mediately or immediately, the first taker takes the whole estate; if it be limited to the heirs but to those of the recoveree. Hence it is preferable, in some cases, to a fine, as a fine lets in the incumbrances of the ancestors as well as those of the cognizers. Watk., 134, Ante, p.610 (n. 1). On the other hand, a fine is, in some instances, preferable to a recovery, as the former operates as an estoppel by the statute, where a recovery would not estop. Pig. Rec, 32, 34, 55; 2 Cru., 271; Plowd., 515, Ante, p. 610 (n. 2). But no tenant in tail can, by suffering a common recovery, bar any charges which are an incumbrance on his own estate, nor any estates derived out of his own estate tail. On the contrary, he may give stability to these estates and charges, by suffering a common recovery. Good-right vs. Mead, 3 Burr., 1703; Stapilton vs. Stapilton, 1 Atk., 2; 1 Prest. Conv., 142. With respect to the persons who may suffer recoveries.- A recovery may be suffered by a tenant in fee-simple, in order to strengthen the title, Watk., 135; but it will not bar an executory devise or springing use annexed to that estate. Pells vs. Brown, Cro. Jac, 590; Palm., 131; 2 Fearn., Ex. Dev., 66, 69; Pig. Rec, 134; though a recovery by tenant in tail will bar an executory devise or springing use annexed to his estate. Page v. Hay ward, 2 Salk., 570; 1 Prest. Conv., 3. So a feme covert may convey her freehold and inheritance by suffering a recovery; and no fine is necessary on account of coverture, when a recovery is suffered. 1 Prest. Conv., 34. The husband has the freehold in right of his wife, and he alone may convey the freehold to make a good tenant to the praecipe, 2 Rol. Abr., 394, pl. 4; Robinson v. cumming, Cas. Temp. Talb., 114; Atk., 473; but the wife will not be barred unless she is vouched. 1 Prest. Conv., 56. Where the wife has the freehold by way of separate estate, she is to be considered as a feme sole, and alone is competent to make a good tenant of the freehold. 1 Prest. Conv., 34, 36. A recovery, with the concurrence of the freeholder, may be suffered by a tenant in tail, either in possession, reversion, or remainder, 2 Rol. Abr., 394; or by a person who has the right of an estate tail once vested, and which has been devested or discontinued, Maxwell's case, 2 Plowd., 8 b. 3 Co., 6; Sheffield v. Ratcliffe, Hob., 334; Lincoln College case, 3 Co., 38 b.; or, as before observed, by the heir in tail, after the estate tail has been barred by fine, or the heirs are bound by warranty. Supra, p. 614; Barton v. Leaver, Cro. Eliz., 388. But a person who has a contingent or executory interest in tail, as under an executory devise, or a springing or shifting use, cannot suffer a common recovery with effect, so as to bar either his own interest (except by way of estoppel), or the issue in tail, or those in remainder or reversion; nor can the issue in tail suffer a common recovery with effect in the lifetime of the ancestor. Apprise v. Apprise, 1 Keb., 391; 1 Prest. Conv., 142; 1 Prest. Abst., 395. The alienee of a tenant in tail, or the assignee of the crown, claiming the estate of a tenant in tail under an attainder for treason, cannot, in any case, bar the estate tail or the reof his body, he takes a fee-tail; if to his heirs, a fee-simple." 4