Text: William Hand Browne, “[Review of Ingram's edition of Poe's Works],” Southern Magazine (Baltimore, MD), vol. 16, no. 6, June 1875, pp. 640-650

[page 640:]

REVIEWS.

——

The Works of Edgar Allan Poe. Edited by John H. Ingram. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black. (Toronto, Canada: Campbell).

THROUGH the courtesy of the editor, Mr. Ingram, there now lies before us a copy of a work which we have long wished to see, and the non-existence of which has been a discreditable defect in our literature — a carefully-prepared edition of the works of Poe, with a memoir of the author in which conscientious pains have been taken to ascertain the facts of his life as distinguished from the fictions about it, and to form a true estimate of the character of this remarkable man. Mr. Ingram, while laboring under the great disadvantage of residence in a foreign country, has zealously explored every accessible source for his materials, has corresponded with every one from whom he could hope for assistance in his task, and ransacked all available repositories for material; and to the immense mass thus collected has applied the test of criticism to separate the true from the false. Some unimportant errors: have been discovered by him since the memoir was in type, and as these are corrected by his hand in the copy before us, and will be rectified in the next edition, we shall not further advert to them. As the American copyright on Poe's works prevents this Edinburgh edition from being re-published or offered for sale, we shall extract more liberally from the memoir than we are accustomed to do with works that are procurable by our readers.*

The circumstances attending the production of the Memoir of Poe usually prefixed to the American editions of his works, are peculiar and probably without example in literary history. It has often happened that unjust and defamatory biographies of men have been written after their death; but never, we think, has the case occurred in which a man in the expectation of death has placed his works and reputation in the hands of another in the full belief that both will be honorably dealt with, and that other has accepted the solemn trust, and has discharged it as it has been discharged by the Reverend Rufus W. Griswold. It has never, to our knowledge, occurred that a memoir of this character has been affixed to any author's works, and remained almost to the present day, with the exception of occasional ineffectual protests, the accepted biography of that author. When grave errors, or wilful misrepresentations are exposed in a work of the kind, haste is usually made to correct them, as public indignation is almost sure to follow the neglect; but in Poe's case this seems to have been reversed: disproof produced no retraction of calumnies, and their reiteration no disturbance of equanimity.

Edgar Allan Poe is usually said to have been born in Baltimore or [page 641:] in Richmond, but in fact (as he himself says) he was born in Boston, where his parents had stopped while on a journey, on the 19th of January 1809. At the age of six he had the misfortune to lose both his parents, and was adopted by his godfather, Mr. Allan of Richmond. In 1816,he went with his adopted parents to England, who placed him at the Manor House School in Stoke-Newington. This school, and his life there, are generally asserted to have been described autobiographically by Poe in his story of “William Wilson,” but as regards the first of these statements, Mr. Ingram, who has visited the place, says the description of the building rather corresponds with the old manorial residence facing the school, than with the school-house itself. In 1821, young Poe returned home, and was placed at an academy in Richmond. While here he met with a lady, Mrs. Stannard, whose kindness to him produced a lasting impression upon his mind, and whose premature death saddened him for years. It was this ideal boy-love that gave birth to his lines “To Helen,” and the juvenile poem “The Paean,” which was afterwards retouched into “Lenore”; and for months after her death he used to pay nightly visits to her grave.

In February 1826, he matriculated at the University of Virginia. Mr. Griswold, having given his birth-year as 1811, makes him enter the University after passing only “a few months” at the Richmond academy, consequently when he was only in his eleventh or twelfth year. His career there, his reverend biographer chronicles thus: here “he led a very dissipated life; the manners which then prevailed there were extremely dissolute, and he was known as the wildest and most reckless student of his class; but his unusual opportunities, and the remarkable ease with which he mastered the most difficult studies, kept him all the while in the first rank for scholarship, and-he would have graduated with the highest honors, had not his gambling, intemperance, and other vices, induced his expulsion from the University.”

It is evident that Dr. Griswold did not think it worth while to inquire if these charges were true, before placing them on record. Others have done so, however, and Mr. Ingram is able to lay before the world a different version, resting upon authority of a different kind.

“On May 22, 1860, Dr. Stephen Maupin, President of the University of Virginia, in answer to various inquiries made of him relative to Poe's career at Charlottesville, procured a statement from Mr. William Wertenbaker, Secretary of the Faculty, which he further indorsed with the remark that ‘Mr. Wertenbaker's statement is worthy of entire confidence.’ ‘I may add,’ he continues, ‘that there is nothing on the Faculty records to the prejudice of Mr. Poe. He appears to have been a successful student, having obtained distinction in Latin and French at the closing examinations of 1826. He never graduated here, no provision for conferring degrees of any kind having been made at the time he was a student here.’”:

‘This is Mr. Wertenbaker's statement: “Edgar A. Poe was a student of the University of Virginia during the second session which commenced February 1st 1826, and terminated December 15th of the same year. He signed the matriculation-book on the 14th of February, [page 642:] and remained in good standing as a student until the session closed. . . . He belonged to the schools of ancient and modern languages, and as I was myself a member of the latter, I can certify that he was tolerably regular in attendance, and a very successful student, having obtained distinctions in it at the final examination, the highest honor a student could then obtain, the present regulation in regard to degrees not having been at the time adopted In a biographical sketch of Mr. Poe, I have seen it stated that he was at one time expelled from the University, but that he afterwards returned and graduated with the highest honors. This is entirely a mistake. He spent but one session at the University, and at no time did he fall under the censure of the Faculty. He was not at that time addicted to drinking, but had an ungovernable passion for card-playing.”

The portions of this statement which, for brevity's sake, we have omitted, refer to Poe's age at matriculation, a scholastic achievement of his, and “a very pleasant hour” spent in his company.

In 1827 Poe started off for Europe with the design of offering his aid to the Greeks in their struggle for independence. He “was absent for more than a year, but the adventures of his journey have never been told.” As for Mr. Griswold's statement, that he made his way to St. Petersburg, where he was arrested for drunkenness, and released through the influence of the U. S. Minister, he gives us no authority for it, any more than for his expulsion from the University.

In 1829 Poe returned home, and a scholarship at West Point being obtained for him, he entered as a cadet on July 1, 1830. Here, according to Mr. Griswold, “his habits of dissipation were renewed; he neglected his duty and disobeyed orders; and in ten months from his matriculation he was cashiered.” Mr. Ingram, on the authority of one of Poe's fellow-cadets, tells us that he “would not, or could not follow its mathematical requirements,” and that he neglected drill. The sentence of the court-martial which dismissed him on January 7th 1831, specified solely “absence from parade,” as the nature of his offences.

In 1829 Poe had published a small volume of poems, and in 1831, before his dismissal he produced a second small volume designed for private circulation, which did not find much favor with his fellow-students, to whom he dedicated it, and who considered — to quote the words of one of them — “the author cracked, and the verses ridiculous doggerel.”

On leaving West Point, Poe returned to his adopted father's residence, and while there became attached, Mr. Ingram tells us, and it is thought engaged, to a Miss Royster, a match which Mr. Allan refused to sanction. The result deepened the estrangement between the two; a quarrel ensued, after which Poe again left his roof, with the intention of aiding the Poles in their revolt. The news of the fall of Warsaw, and virtual termination of the conflict, prevented him, it .is believed, from leaving this country, and he again turned towards, if not to, his old home. “In the meanwhile . . . . Mr. Allan had taken to himself a young wife — ‘the beautiful Miss Paterson’ — while Miss Royster, forgetful of her faith, was married. to a wealthy man, a Mr. Shelton. Once more aimless, and probably resourceless, [page 643:] the chivalric young poet again sought his native province. Whether he returned to the home that was a home no more, is uncertain, but from what is known of his proud spirit, it seems unlikely; if he did, however, his stay was of short duration, and his godfather's second wife having given birth to a son, was the death-blow to Poe's hopes of succeeding to the property.” There can be no doubt that Poe was wilful, headstrong, disobedient to commands and indifferent to counsel; and Mr. Allan can not be blamed for feeling indignant, and remembering — perhaps reminding him — that he had no claim upon him but such as was founded on his generosity, while there were those now of his own blood, whose future he was bound to provide for. That Poe's conduct was censurable, no one will deny; but it has at least this palliation, that he did not attempt to minister to his self-interest by fawning and dissimulation. The whole quarrel is intelligible enough, and his literary executor need not have insinuated “an act scarcely suitable for repetition”, supporting it in a note of later date by a similar insinuation from an anonymous writer in the Messenger for 1850, who hints unutterable things, and while stating nothing that may be brought to test, leaves the reader to infer the worst. Mr. Ingram remarks that “Poe's subsequent kindly reception by those acquainted with all parties concerned”, is a sufficient answer to this nameless slander. This critique in the Messenger, by the way, is rather an odd production. Written in a very crude and bombastic style, it seems meant as a eulogy on Poe's writings and a lampoon on his character. The writer's trustworthiness, even where he makes a direct statement — and here he only hints at a doubtful story — may be judged by a fact which shall presently be given.

For a year or so we discover scarcely any trace of Poe's movements; but in 1833 we find him in Baltimore, competing for prizes offered by the proprietor of the Saturday Visitor [[Visiter]] for the best story and the best poem. The judges were the well-known gentlemen, John P. Kennedy, J. H. B. Latrobe, and Dr. James H. Miller. Mr. Griswold tells the story of the award thus: —

We do not know whether Mr. Griswold is speaking from any experience of his own on a similar committee, when he explains how the thing is usually done. It is not, we think, the way it is done in Baltimore; and most assuredly not the way it would ever have been done by the gentlemen named above, to whom the biographer's words are a gross and gratuitous insult. In point of fact the committee only awarded the prize after careful consideration of all the contributions. They announced the award in the following words: — [page 644:]

As this card was published, the gentleman who had accepted the charge of doing justice to the dead poet's name and fame, might easily have stated the true facts in the case, instead of affirming that the committee read but one MS., and gave the prize in consideration of the legible writing, not of merit. Or, when the adjudicators published an emphatic denial of the statement, he might have corrected it, had such suited his purpose. Here we have a means of judging the trustworthiness of the anonymous critic in the Messenger. Griswold, it will be seen, speaks of the way “such matters are usually disposed of,” leaving the public to understand that this was the way it was done in this case. But this anonymous writer, with a livelier imagination than Griswold, writes as if he had been present with the committee. “Of course,” he says, referring to the manuscripts, “of course they did not read them. But while chatting over the wine at the meeting, one of them was attracted by the beautiful chirography,” &c. Griswold, by the way, might have taken a hint from this, and cited this critic's vague rumor of scandal before alluded to, as well-authenticated fact. Did not one good turn deserve another?

From this time Mr. Kennedy befriended the young poet, treating him, indeed, almost as he might a kinsman. In the latter part of 1834, Mr. T. W. White — ”a man of much simplicity, purity, and energy of character,” says Mr. Griswold — established the Southern Literary Messenger in Richmond, and engaged Poe, first as contributor, and afterwards, in September, 1835, as assistant editor. In this year his marriage took place.

It is characteristic of Mr. Griswold, by the way, that he suspects everybody of lying. “Mr. White,” he says, “announced that Poe was its [the Messenger's] editor,” but that “it is probable that he was engaged only as a general contributor and writer of critical notices of books.” Now it is possible, as Mr. White does not name Poe, but only speaks of his prospective editor as “a gentleman of approved literary taste,” that he may have been referring to another person. But it is most likely that Mr. White referred to Poe, and had engaged him as editor, with the understanding that he was to remove to Richmond later; as he did in September. Mr. Griswold, however, thinks it “probable” that this gentleman of so much “simplicity and purity of character”, lied to the public, and announced an editorial arrangement which he had not made.

In 1837, Poe left the Messenger, having found more lucrative employment on the staff of the New York Quarterly Review. Mr. White, in a note to his subscribers, testified to the ability of the [page 645:] retiring editor, and promised them future contributions from his pen. The cause of Poe's resignation Mr. White always explained to be that above given: Mr. Griswold (on his own authority apparently) states that he was dismissed for drunkenness. The same biographer also asserts that Poe's sole contribution to that work was his review of Stephens's Incidents of Travel. Mr. Ingram, however, finds, from the evidence of those who knew him, that he was a constant contributor to its pages, and that the severity of his criticisms made him many enemies.

Among the notices of Poe's life at this period which Mr. Ingram has collected, is an interesting account by the late Mr. William Gowans, the well-known bibliopolist, who boarded with Poe's family. Mr. Gowans writes: — “For eight months or more one house contained us, one table fed. During that time I saw much of him, and had an opportunity of conversing with him often, and I must say that I never saw him the least affected with liquor, nor even descend to any known vice, while he was one of the most courteous, gentlemanly and intelligent companions I ever met with during my journeys and haltings through divers divisions of the globe.”

In the latter part of 1838, he became a contributor to the Gentleman's Magazine, a journal published in Philadelphia, to which city he removed; and in May 1839, he became its editor. His salary being small, he was compelled to turn his hand to other literary work. Here Griswold finds opportunity for another charge. He states, on the authority of a Philadelphia paper, that Poe reprinted a popular English work on conchology written by Captain Thos. Brown, and copyrighted it as his own. This charge was afterwards disproved in the Home Journal, by Poe's collaborator in the work in question, Professor Wyatt, who had obtained Poe's assistance in the compilation of several works on Natural History. “Among others was a Manual of Conchology, and to this Poe, whose scientific knowledge was most comprehensive and exact, contributed so largely that the publishers were fully justified in using his popular name on the title-page, though he only received a share of the profits. Brown's Text-Book of Conchology necessarily bears some resemblance to the combined work of Poe and Wyatt, from the simple fact that both treatises are founded on the system laid down by Lamarck; but the absurd charge that one is therefore plagiarised from the other, can only have arisen from gross ignorance or wilful falsehood.”

The story that Griswold gives — without authority, as usual — of Poe's having surreptitiously made transcripts of the subscription-books of the Gentleman's Magazine, for the purpose of supplanting it by a journal of his own, and his story about an insult to Burton, resulting in his immediate dismissal, are sufficiently answered by the fact that he remained as editor of the Gentleman's until it was purchased by Mr. George R. Graham and merged in Graham's Magazine, Poe being still retained as editor. While connected with this journal, some of his best work appeared. He left this journal in November 1842, from what cause is not known, but that it was not on account of his alleged drunkenness Mr. Graham's emphatic and indignant denial sufficiently proves. [page 646:]

On leaving Graham's, Poe thought of starting a journal to be called the Stylus, of which Mr. Thomas C, Clarke, of Philadelphia, was to be the publisher. Mr. Griswold says that he failed to find a publisher “on account of the unfortunate notoriety of his habits.” Mr. Ingram remarks, “Mr. Clarke, who is still residing in Philadelphia, speaks in high terms of Poe's probity and honor, as indeed does every one, save Griswold, who had dealings with him.” It was during his residence in Philadelphia, by the way, that Poe had the misfortune to make the acquaintance of the Rev. R. W. Griswold.

In 1844 Poe removed to New York, and “now was in the metropolis,” instead of the “provincial towns” in which he had resided before, according to Mr. Griswold's phrase.* Here he was employed by N. P. Willis and General Morris, as sub-editor of The Mirror. In this connection Mr. Ingram quotes a letter from Willis to Morris, written in 1859.

“Poe,” writes Mr. Willis, “came to us quite incidentally, neither of us having been personally acquainted with him till that time; and his position towards us, and connection with us, of course unaffected by claims of previous friendship, were a fair average of his general intercourse and impressions. As he was a man who never smiled, and never said a propitiatory or deprecating word, we were not likely to have been seized with any sudden partiality or wayward caprice in his favor. . . . It was rather a step downward, after being the chief editor of several monthlies, as Poe had been, to come into the office of a daily journal as a mechanical paragraphist. It was his business to sit at a desk, in a corner of the editorial room, ready to be called upon for any of the miscellaneous work of the day; yet you remember how absolutely and how good-humoredly ready he was for any suggestion; how punctually and industriously reliable in the following out of the wish once expressed; how cheerful and present-minded his work when he might excusably have been so listless and abstracted. We loved the man for the entireness of the fidelity with which he served us. When he left us, we were very reluctant to part with him; but we could not object — he was to take the lead in another periodical.”

This periodical was the Broadway Journal, of which he had the sole management in July, and of which he became the sole proprietor in October, 1845. He had, however, not the physical ability to perform all the duties of editor and manager, nor the means to obtain efficient aid, and he was obliged to resign it in January 1846.

In the May number of Godey's Lady's Book, Poe had begun a series of critiques, called the “Literati of New York,” which excited much attention, and aroused some wrath among the parties more severely handled. A Mr., or Dr. Dunn English was among the writers criticised, and instead of waiting, as others did, to revenge themselves on his memory, he “‘retaliated in a personal newspaper article,’ remarks Duyckinck, in his invaluable Encyclopedia, ‘and the communication [page 647:] was reprinted in the Evening Mirror in New York; whereupon Poe instituted a libel suit against that journal, and recovered several hundred dollars.’” Mr. Ingram continues:

“If there be any one entertaining the slightest belief in Griswold's veracity, let him now refer to his account of this affair in the soi-disant ‘Memoir,’ and compare it with the facts of the case. . . . ‘ Poe's article,’ he [Griswold] continues, ‘ was entirely false in what purported to be the facts. The statement of Dr. English appeared in the New York Mirror of the 23d June, and on the 27th Mr. Poe sent to Mr. Godey, for publication in the Lady's Book, his rejoinder, which Mr. Godey very properly declined to print.’ This led, asserts Griswold, ‘to a disgraceful quarrel,’ and to the ‘premature conclusion’ of the Literati; and that Poe ceased to write for the Lady's Book in consequence of Mr. Godey's justifiable refusal.

“Poe's review of English appeared in the second, or June number of the Literati, and from our knowledge of Griswold's habitual inaccuracy, we were not surprised to find, upon reference to the magazine, that the sketches ran their stipulated course until October, and that Poe continued to contribute to the Lady's Book until a short time previous to his decease in 1849, nor were we surprised to find Mr. Godey writing to the Knickerbocker Magazine in defence and praise of Poe's ‘honorable and blameless conduct’; but what certainly did startle us was to discover that the whole of the personalities of the supposed critique included in the collection of Poe's works edited by Griswold, were absent from the real critique published in the Lady's Book!” “It is impossible,” Mr. Ingram writes elsewhere, “to reproduce the whole of this audacious fabrication, but a comparison between some passages of Poe's review in the Lady's Book and the article in Griswold's collection will convince the most skeptical that, since the days of Ireland or Psalmanazar, no more shameless imposition has been foisted on the public. ‘Brief poems’ are changed into ‘scraps of verse.’ ‘Barry Cornwall and others of the bizarre school are his especial favorites,’ is transformed into ‘When Barry Cornwall, for example, sings about a “dainty rhythm,” Mr. Brown forthwith, in B flat, hoots about it too.’ ‘I learn,’ says Poe's paper, ‘that Mr. Brown is not without talent, but the fate of the Aristidean should indicate to him the necessity of applying himself to study; ‘ but this is altered to ‘Mr. Brown has at least that amount of talent which would enable him to succeed in his father's profession — that of a ferryman on the Schuylkill; but the fate of the Aristidean should indicate to him that to prosper in any-higher walk of life, he must apply himself to study.’ The whole of the grossly personal and badly-worded portion, beginning at ‘Were I writing,’ down to ‘Mr. Brown had for the motto on his magazine cover the words of Richelieu —

Here the two monosyllables, an ass, should have been appended. They were no doubt omitted through “one of those d —— d typographical blunders,” which, through life, have been at once the bane and the antidote of Mr. Brown’ — the whole of this, we reiterate, as [page 648:] well as some other portions of equal coarseness, are absent from Poe's critique.” Nor is this the only case of interpolation that can be shown.

In the summer of 1846 Poe removed to a cottage at Fordham, Westchester Co., New York. Here, after a lingering illness, his wife died, tended to the last with fond affection by her mother and her husband, whose poverty, however, prevented them from giving the invalid all the requisite comforts. Mr. Ingram gives some interesting, but in part too painful reminiscences of this time of suffering at Fordham from the pen of Mrs. Gove Nichols. News of the poet's destitution and afflictions getting abroad, Mr. N. P. Willis — one of the most kindly and generous-hearted of men — made an appeal in his behalf (without Poe's knowledge) in the Home Journal, and suggested that there should be some system of relief for literary men who depended for subsistence on their pens, when cut off by sickness or other misfortune from this resource. This drew from Poe (whose wife was then dying) a grateful letter to Willis, in which, however, he complains of the way his afflictions have, by some parties, been dragged before the public, and also of anonymous letters written to his dying wife. This letter, the tone of which is as manly as it is pathetic, Mr. Griswold declares to have been “written for effect.” The death of his wife, which left Poe utterly prostrated in mind and body for weeks, gave an opening for other calumnies, even the most incredible. The Rev. Mr. Gilfillan affirms that Poe deliberately caused the death of his wife, that he might have a subject for his “Raven,” a poem published two years before. It is said that corruptio optimi pessima; and it would seem that if a clergyman ever renounces, in any case, justice, mercy, and truth, he is capable of a vileness of malignity quite unattainable by laymen.

The rest of the year 1847 Poe remained at Fordham with his wife's mother, who clung to him throughout life with all a mother's affection, and who, after his death, desirous of having justice done to the memory of one who “had been,” as she wrote, “more than a son to her in the long-continued and affectionate observance of every duty,” placed his MSS. in the hands of the Rev. Rufus W. Griswold.

In 1848 Poe issued the prospectus of a literary magazine to be called The Stylus, but being unable to obtain the requisite support, he had to abandon the plan. In the same year he delivered a lecture on the Universe (afterwards published as “Eureka”), and one on the “Female Poets of America.” Shortly after this he went to Richmond, and became a contributor to the Messenger, then under the control of that most estimable and accomplished gentleman, John R. Thompson, who became much attached to him. About this time the poet was engaged to be married to Mrs. Whitman, the poet, who has since in a published work done what she could to vindicate his memory.

In December of this year this engagement, which was highly disapproved by the lady's family, came to an end. Griswold, as usual without authority, charges the poet with drunken outrages at the lady's house. This charge was publicly denied by Mr. Pabodie, a gentleman of high position and character, who was intimate with the [page 649:] parties and the circumstances. In the New York Tribune of June 7, 1852, Mr. Pabodie says, “I am authorised to say, not only from my personal knowledge, but also from the statements of all who were conversant with the affair, that there exists not a shadow of foundation for the story above alluded to.” He goes on to say that at the time in question he was with Poe daily, and continues, “I was acquainted with the circumstances of his engagement, and the causes which led to its dissolution,” and concludes with an earnest appeal to Griswold to do all that now lies in his power “to remove an undeserved stigma from the memory of the departed.” Griswold replied by a threatening letter, which provoked a rejoinder containing such an exposure of his falsifications as reduced him to silence.

The winter of 1848-9, and the following spring Poe passed at Fordham, and during this time he is said to have written a book entitled Phases of American Literature. “Mr. M. A. Daly states that he saw the complete work; but the manuscript would seem to have disappeared.” We do not know whether it was included in the mass of his papers that were entrusted to his literary executor.

“‘When in Richmond,’” Mr. Ingram quotes from Mr. Thompson, “‘he made the office of the Messenger a place of frequent resort. His conversation was always attractive, and at times very brilliant.’” In a letter dated 1853 Mr. Thompson refers to a conversation he had had in Florence with Mr. and Mrs. Browning, on the subject of Poe, adding, “the two poets . . . feel a strong desire to see his memory vindicated from moral aspersion.”

On the 4th of October Poe left Richmond, on his way. as was believed, to Fordham. He was unwell at starting. Mr. Ingram, at the time his memoir went to press, was not informed of the true circumstances of Poe's death, which we subjoin. When he reached Baltimore, it was on the eve of an election. At that time it was not uncommon for strangers or friendless persons to be seized by ruffians and hurried off to dens, called “coops,” where they were confined, maltreated, and forced to vote according to their captors’ wishes. If they refused, they were drugged to stupefaction, and then carried around and “voted” at various wards. Poe was thus “cooped” and drugged, taken to vote at eleven different wards, and then turned adrift in a dying condition. When he recovered his senses, he was in the Washington University Hospital, where he died on Sunday, October the seventh, 1849.

It has been more than once said to us, when making inquiries into the veritable facts of Poe's life, — ” Better let poor Poe alone: there has been talk enough about him. His calumniators have got the world's ear, and besides, nothing can help or hurt him now.” Against this sentiment we then protested, and shall ever earnestly protest. The dead, it is true, pass out of the reach of our help or of our malice, but they leave with us their good name as a sacred trust. Harsh and unjust judgments may be listened to in silence, with the confidence that time will correct them; but direct downright lying must be met with prompt disproof, or it will strike root and scatter seed and defy extirpation. In the case of Poe, his enemies seem to have been animated by malignity of a peculiarly venomous and contagious [page 650:] type, which has infected even those who had not the remotest cause for dislike. We have seen in an English journal of repute, a quotation from Poe used to embellish an article, and followed immediately by a brutal insult to the author. A recent compiler of “popular readings” helps himself liberally from Poe, and vituperates him in his square-inch of “biographical sketch” as if he were a moral pariah, not to be named without abhorrence. Even Poe's admirers have accepted the catalogue of easily-disproved calumnies without question, and have contented themselves with deploring the moral obliquities of “‘ erratic genius.” And in a work of the character of Allibone's Dictionary of Authors, we find that the industrious compiler has succeeded in compressing all the slanders into his brief sketch, followed by the usual sigh at the stern mandate of truth that wrings these admissions from a reluctant but “faithful chronicler,” and closing with these singular words: — “That we have told less than the whole truth, or alleged truth, many of our readers can affirm — and none better than those who are familiar with the remarkable record in which Poe's ‘literary executor,’ Dr. Griswold, has embalmed the least creditable points of his friend's character.” It is a pity that this “faithful chronicler,” whose work pretends to be a standard book of reference, and who can devote seven of his vast pages to a puff — we can not call it a eulogy — of the mild mediocrity of Longfellow, did not take some small pains, at least to the extent of looking at published refutations, to see whether Griswold's “remarkable record” was truth or falsehood.

The fact is, it is this detestable cant of hypocrisy that has given these slanders their virulence of contagion: “It grieves us to have to say anything to the discredit of our poor dear friend: so gladly would we cover his frailties with the mantle of charity; but, alas! we are the slaves of truth, and though it wrings our hearts, must confess” — and then out comes the whole budget.

Now it is time there was an end of all this. There is no reason why any one should blush for the name of Poe, or claim for his memory any larger charity than ordinary human frailty requires. That he was proud, sensitive, and sometimes unreasonable, may be freely admitted. That he was afflicted with that well-known and terrible disease of the brain and nervous centres which produces in the patient at times a maddening and irresistible craving for alcoholic stimulus, all men know. It may be that at times, in these paroxysms of insanity he did insane things; though we have no credible evidence of it. But apart from these we affirm with emphasis that there was nothing in the poet's life disgraceful, degrading, or unworthy of a gentleman; and nothing, even without this exception, that is not readily condoned by society in the lives of others who are spared the calamities of poverty, affliction, and a literary executor.

W. H. B.

[[Footnotes]]

[The following footnote appears at the bottom of page 640:]

* This copyright, of the date of 1849, is in the name of J. S. Redfield. We should like to know, as a matter of curiosity, to whom the sum paid for the copyright accrued.

[The following footnote appears at the bottom of page 646:]

* The fondness of New Yorkers for calling other cities “provincial” is amusing. Did they but know what they are talking about, they would know that New York itself is the most thoroughly provincial city in the country. For provincialism, in an objectionable sense, is not the preference for our own town or neighborhood, its people and ways, above all others; but the attaching exaggerated importance to them, and supposing that all the world sees them with our eyes. The provincialism which makes New Yorkers boast — not that their city is large and wealthy, but that it is the one metropolis, all others being insignificant in comparison, is provincialism of the purest type.