By the Rev. W. HB. Jones. 365 
of an old manuscript, a somewhat different account, and represents 
‘Rachel Baynton’ as having a yet stronger claim to be the inheritor 
of the ‘ Hall’ property.!. A very careful search amongst all docu- 
ments, to which access could be gained, likely to throw any light 
on the matter, has discovered no entry that accounts for a daugh- 
ter, Elizabeth, born to John Hall, or for the marriage of Thomas 
Baynton with such daughter. Even on the presumption that John 
Hall died without issue at all, Rachel, baptized at Chaldfield in 
April 1695 as “the daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Baynton,” 
would have some claims upon him, no less than ‘ William Pearce,’ 
whom, in default of her having male issue, he appointed to be the 
next inheritor. ‘Rachel Baynton’ was, in fact, through his wife, 
his great-niece ;—‘ William Pearce’ was, through his sister, his 
great-nephew. Supposing there were no nearer relationship, there 
was nothing improbable, or, we may add, unjust, in John Hall’s 
thus leaving his large estates to Rachel Baynton. 
The young and rich heiress married William Pierrepont, 
Esq.,2 wuo bore the courtesy title of Lord Kingston, only son 
' The following extract is said to be taken from a MS, in the possession (in 
1837) of Mr. Waldron of Lipiat, and which was itself extracted from an old 
vellum MS. which is now lost, but was at Monks in the year 1744.—‘‘ Sir 
William Eyre of Chaldfield . . . . had two sons, Robert and 
Henry. To Robert he gave Little Chaldfield, lately sold to Mr. Baynton, who 
left it to his youngest son, Thomas Baynton; and Mr, Thomas Baynton’s wife 
had a daughter by Mr. Hall: he gave her all his estate; and this lady married 
the Marquis of Dorchester, and was mother to the last Duke of Kingston.”— 
References contirmatory of the same fact are given, in a note to Walker’s Chald- 
field (p. 8.), to Duapatn’s English Peerage Vol. ii. p.p. 18, 19, and Burkn’s 
Extinct and Dormant Peerage, p. 420. 
*A special Act of Parliament was obtained for the purpose of settling John 
Hall’s estates on William Pierrepont and Rachel Baynton on their marriage. 
In the Act, to the original of which, in its engrossed form, in the Library of the 
House of Lords reference has been made, there is no mention of any relationship 
between John Hall and Rachel Baynton, The Act was obtained with difficulty 
in consequence of much opposition to it; and matters were the more complicated 
by the death of John Hall during its progress through the Commons. A petition 
was presented by William Coward, Esq., who, in default of legitimate issue was 
the next of kin to John Hall, setting forth that ‘‘the Bill, in case it should pass, 
would greatly prejudice the Petitioner and praying to be heard by counsel 
against it.’”’ ‘The Bill however passed with several amendments, and received 
the Royal assent 16th May, 1711. A rider was added to the Bill to the follow- 
