He was afterwards for several years a member of the New Hampshire Legislature, and assisted in revising the code of that State.  He paid much attention to the subject of the judicature, and performed his services fully to the satisfaction of the State; and the result of his labors was warmly commended.  In 1824 he was again a candidate for the Senate of the United States.  The election was to be made by the concurrent vote of the two branches of the Legislature.  In the popular branch he was chosen by a strong vote.  The Senate, however, non-concurred; by which means the election was lost,—­a loss to the country, not to him,—­by force of circumstances and agencies not now or ever fit to be recalled or remembered.

He continued to reside for many years in Portsmouth.  His residence in that ancient town was a happy one.  He was happy in his family and in the society of the town, surrounded by agreeable neighbors, respected by the bar and the court, and standing at the head of his profession.  He had a great love of conversation.  He took pleasure in hearing others talk, and gave an additional charm by the freshness, agreeableness, and originality of his own observations.  His warm hospitality left him never alone, and his usefulness was felt as much within the walls of the homes, as of the tribunals, of Portsmouth.  There are yet many in that town who love him and his; many who witnessed, as children, and recollect, the enthusiasm with which he was greeted by their fathers and mothers; and all in New Hampshire old enough to remember him will feel what we feel here on this occasion.

Led at last partly by the desire of exerting his abilities in a larger sphere of usefulness, and partly by the fact of the residence here of beloved domestic connections, he came to this city, and entered upon the performance of his professional duties in 1832.  Of the manner in which he discharged those duties, this court is the most competent judge.  You, Mr. Chief Justice, and the venerable associate who usually occupies a place at your right,[2] have been witnesses of the whole.  You know the fidelity with which he observed his duty to the court, as well as his duty to his clients.  In learning, assiduity, respect for the bench, uprightness, and integrity, he stood as an example to the bar.  You know the general probity and talent with which he performed, for so many years, the duty of a counsellor of this court.

I should hardly trust myself to make any analysis of Mr. Mason’s mind.  I may be a partial judge.  But I may speak of what I myself admire and venerate.  The characteristics of Mr. Mason’s mind, as I think, were real greatness, strength, and sagacity.  He was great through strong sense and sound judgment, great by comprehensive views of things, great by high and elevated purposes.  Perhaps sometimes he was too cautious and refined, and his distinctions became too minute; but his discrimination arose from a force of intellect, and quick-seeing, far-reaching sagacity, everywhere discerning his object and pursuing it steadily.  Whether it was popular or professional, he grasped a point and held it with a strong hand.  He was sarcastic sometimes, but not frequently; not frothy or petulant, but cool and vitriolic.  Unfortunate for him on whom his sarcasm fell!