William Chaytor was a descendant of Christopher Chaytor, who had acquired the prestigious Croft estate, on the Yorkshire bank of the River Tees near Darlington, in the early sixteenth century. His father, also William, had been MP for Penryn, 1774-80, and Cornwall, 1780-90. Chaytor established his initial wealth through investments in lead mines at Swaledale and Teesdale, and in 1816 he purchased the 2,383 acre Witton Castle estate and coalfield at a cost of £78,000. On succeeding his father in 1819 he inherited the Croft estate and family property in Wensleydale in the North Riding of Yorkshire.
Following an abortive attempt to contest Durham City at the June 1828 by-election, Chaytor came forward for the same constituency at the 1830 general election on a pro-Reform and pro-Catholic platform, but after a fractious campaign, came in third. Although the election was declared void on petition, he declined to offer again at the subsequent by-election for fear of being petitioned against for bribery, but instead put up his son, also William, as a stopgap until the next general election.
An occasional attender, Chaytor generally divided with Grey’s administration, although his radical instincts saw him in minorities for a review of the pension lists, 18 Feb. 1834, and for the repeal of the Septennial Act, 15 May 1834. His absence from the vote on Grote’s ballot motion, 25 Apr. 1833, was criticised by his local agent, J.J. Wright, who told him that ‘all the factions opposed to you will make a handle of your absence – the ballot being a point you always put forward prominently’.
Chaytor’s attempts to defend his seat at the 1835 general election were fatally undermined when his agent, Wright, switched his political allegiance to the Conservatives in protest against what he perceived as the interference of the earl of Durham and his supporters in the Liberal campaign.
Described by a contemporary as ‘a heavy, broad-featured old gentleman, with a cloddish expression of countenance, an eccentricity in dress, and a perfect oddity in the manner of expressing himself’, Chaytor failed to make any impact in his parliamentary career, with one unsympathetic historian commenting that ‘men have done less for a crown than Chaytor did for his baronetcy’.
