MASON THE POET.
The merit of this gentleman as a poet is well known. However he was not satisfied with the applause he received in that character; he was desirous also of being esteemed a good musician and a good painter. In music he succeeded better than in painting. He performed decently on the harpsichord, and by desire, I undertook, says Dr. Miller, in the History of Doncaster, to teach him the principles of composition; but that I never could effect. Indeed, others before me had failed in the attempt, nevertheless he fancied himself qualified to compose; for a short Anthem of his, beginning “Lordof all power and might,” was performed at the Chapel Royal, of which only the melody was his own; the bass was composed by another person. The same may be said of two more Anthems, sung in the Cathedral of York. In painting he never arrived even to a degree of mediocrity; so true is Pope’s observation:
“One science only will one genius fit,”So vast is art, so narrow human wit.”
“One science only will one genius fit,”So vast is art, so narrow human wit.”
“One science only will one genius fit,”So vast is art, so narrow human wit.”
“One science only will one genius fit,
”So vast is art, so narrow human wit.”
Fond, however, of being considered as a patron both of music and painting, he contributed to the advancement of several young men by his recommendation: yet I never knew him patronize but one, in either of these arts, whom he did not desert afterwards, without his former favourite ever knowing in what he had offended him.
“When young,” says Dr. Miller, “I was one of those he took under his protection. He permitted me to dedicate the music of some elegies to him, and also gave me pieces of his own writing to set to music, particularly the ‘Ode to Death’ in Caractacus. However, at the end of a few years, I found myself involved in the disgrace of others, though I never knew the cause of my dismissal; most probably our disgrace proceeded from the envy of some officious tale-bearer. On recollection, I have often observed him listen attentively to these characters; and his favourite servant had it in his power to lead him which way he pleased, even to the changing a former acquaintance as easily as he would change his coat. Rather late in life he married Miss Sharman, of Hull, which was his native place. The reason he assigned for making her an offer of marriage was, that he had been a whole evening in her company with others, and observed, that during all that time she never spoke a single word. This lady lived about a year after their marriage. She died at Bristol,where, in the Cathedral, he placed a handsome monument to her memory, on which are inscribed some beautiful and much-admired lines as an epitaph. During the short time this lady lived with him, he appeared more animated and agreeable in his conversation; but after her decease, his former phlegm returned, and he became silent, sullen, and reserved.
“Though he had a good income, and was by no means extravagant, yet he frequently fancied himself poor, to that degree, that he once asked an acquaintance to lend him a hundred pounds, though at that very time he had considerable sums of money in the public funds, for which he neglected taking the interest. A great attachment appeared to exist between him and a very hospitable family in the neighbourhood of Doncaster, to whom he was nearly related, and with whom he used to pass some months in the summer. At length he fancied they expected to receive a good legacy at his decease, but resolving to disappoint them, he did not even mention them in his will, but left the greater part of his property to a person who had formerly been his curate.”
The following Letter from Mason to Dr. Beattie, is preserved in Sir William Forbes’s Life of the latter:
York,17thOctober, 1771.
“In my late melancholy employment of reviewing and arranging the papers, which dearMr. Gray’s friendship bequeathed to my care, I have found nine letters of yours, which I meant to have returned ere this, had I found a safe opportunity by a private hand; but as no such opportunity has yet occurred, I take the liberty of troubling you with this, to enquire how I may best convey them to you. I shall continue here till the12thof next month, and hope in that interval to be favoured with a line from you upon this subject.
“I should deprive myself of a very sincere gratification, if I finished this letter, with the business that occasions it. You must suffer me to thank you for the very high degree of poetical pleasure which the first book of your ‘Minstrel’ gave my imagination, and that equal degree of rational conviction which your ‘Essay on the Immutability of Truth’ impressed on my understanding. I will freely own to you, that the very idea of a Scotsman’s attacking Mr. Hume, prejudiced me so much in favour of the latter piece, that I should have approved it, if, instead of a masterly, it had been only a moderate performance.
“I shall be happy to know, that the remaining books of your ‘Minstrel’ are likely to be published soon. The next best thing, after instructing the world profitably, is to amuse it innocently. England has lost that man, (Mr. Gray) who, of all others in it, was best qualifiedfor both these purposes; but who, from early chagrin and disappointment, had imbibed a disinclination to employ his talents beyond the sphere of self-satisfaction and improvement. May Scotland long possess, in you, a person both qualified and willing to exert his, for the pleasure and benefit of society.”