332 The Wiltshire Compounders. 
other brother, Sir Henry Frederick Thynne, that King Charles at 
this crisis conferred a baronetcy on him, dated 15th June, 1641. 
It is from this latter branch that the present possessors of Longleat 
are derived, 
Domestic disagreemeut did not in this case, as it did in many 
other families, issue in political estrangement, for both the brothers 
were now embarked in the Royal cause. They fell also simul- 
taneously under the power of the Parliament. Sir Henry Frederick 
Thynne was made prisoner at Shrewsbury in September, 1645, and 
being sent for up to London to make composition, his fine was 
declared at £5160, to which he stoutly demurred ; of which more 
hereafter. His residence was Cawse Castle, in Shropshire, in which 
county his estate principally lay, though he had also large property 
in Wiltshire and the neighbourhood of Frome; and here he had 
entirely to relinquish the valuable rectories of Kempsford, Buckland, 
and Laverton into the hands of trustees for augmentation of minis- 
ters’ stipends. But first of all it seemed imperative that the dower 
of “Dame Katharine Thynne” should be confirmed and assigned, 
covering, as it did, a third part of the old rents, manors, and lands 
in Wilts and Somerset, derived from her late husband, Sir Thomas 
Thynne, besides a claim on the other two thirds in execution by 
elegit for satisfaction of £3411, damages recovered by judgment at 
law for so much sustained while her dower was detained. The case 
was accordingly submitted to Mr. Bradshaw; consequent on whose 
report it was— Ordered that the committee by whom the said lands 
are sequestered on Sir James Thynne’s account shall permit her and 
her assigns to enjoy her dower recovered, and also the extended 
lands, according to the report, from the time of the delivery of the 
said lands into her possession by the sheriffs, notwithstanding the 
sequestration aforesaid.” Signed Jonn WILDE. 
Thus matters stood for three years, the fines remaining unpaid, 
till the death of Lady Thynne, in 1650, soon after which event Sir 
Henry caused to be read in the House of Commons a paper entitled 
“The true state of Sir Henry Frederick Thynne’s case ”—showing 
that in the year 1646 his fine both for his real and personal estate 
was by mistake set at a sixth, whereas by his coming into the 
