Text: Bluffdale, “Rev. Dr. Griswold and Edgar Poe” Daily Illinois State Journal (Springfield, IL), vol. X, no. 79, October 20, 1857, p. 2, col. 3

[page 2, column 3, continued:]

MESSRS, EDITORS OF THE JOURNAL: — I could not avoid smiling when I read the strictures which your correspondent “***” gave, in a late number of your paper, upon the short biographical sketch prefixed by the late Dr. Griswold to the writings of Edgar A. Poe.

He sets out with the maxim that only flattering things should be told of dead, and then “abuses like a pickpocket” the Rev. Dr. Griswold, who is just as dead as Edgar Allen [[Allan]] Poe.

After all, Dr. Griswold neither said, nor is it possible for any man to say, things more derogatory to the memory of Poe, that “***” has said in that very article. Let us just look over the catalogue of charges that he himself make. against the man whom he professes to defend. He inform us that Poe was a miserable, drunken pauper, returning with base ingratitude the kindness of his friends and benefactors that he was a bad man — bad in his philosophy, and bad in his practice; hated his fellow men, despising them all, as dupes or villains; envious of those more fortunate than himself; a literary Ishmaël, his hand against every man. To cap the climax of these soft impeachments,” your correspondent adds: “POE broke his wife's heart.” Aye! that gentle being who gave to him, in his wretchedness, the rich treasure of her virgin love, clinging to him with all the devotion of woman, when his ingratitude had driven every one else from him; that gentle being Poe murdered — deliberately murdered, with the most agonizing of all tortures, those of a broken heart.

All this, and even more, your correspondent himself alleges against Edgar Allen [[Allan]] Poe. Again, I ask, what any man, living or dead could, have himself uttered has of done Poe, in more defending him blackening than he himself has done in defending him?

Now, what sin did Dr. Griswold commit in his sketch of Poe, that merits such bitter denunciation from your correspondent? None at all. Not even the shadow of one.

The Doctor was requested to write a biography of Poe, to be prefixed to an edition of his works. I ask every honest man if Dr. Griswold ought to have given a true character of Poe, which he most certainly did, or ought he to have given one that was notoriously false? The Doctor was placed before the world in the character of a witness. Were I called into a court to testify to the character of a man, and should intentionally conceal every thing that was unfavorable to him, would it be speaking too harshly of me to say that I carried a lie in my right hand, and that the Grand Jury ought to indict me for perjury? A man of honor and moral principles will feel himself equally bound to speak the truth, with or without an oath.

Had Dr. G. said nothing in that biography but what was flattering to POE, an honest man he ought to have placed at the head of his that sketch the expressive word, “BLARNEY,” that he might not deceive the public.

The true history of Edgar A. Poe, as written by Dr. Griswold, gives to our literary young men the most valuable lesson that can be found in the whole circle of biography, native or foreign. All this would have been doctor consulted only the sickly sentimentality contained in the false maxim of saying nothing of the dead except what is flattering. Biography would become utterly worthless were writers to adopt this rule of giving a one-sided revelation. When a witness is called upon to testify in the court of biography, let him tell the truth, the whole truth, or remain silent.

A word more. Your correspondent says of Mrs. Osgood: —

I will not be so discourteous as even to hint that the above sentence is sheer, downright “fustian;” but I would respectfully ask from whence does he derive his authority for saying that the best preparation for the awful realities of the unseen world, is the bestowing a benediction upon a soul that God has cast out?

The article of your correspondent bears internal evidence that the writer is governed by warm and generous impulses, and I doubt not had he but known Dr. Griswold personally, he would have spoken of him only in kind terms.

Writers of the “grub street” class, who envied his talents and fame, assailed him as they have assailed every prominent man in our cornet of the republic of letters. men of sterling integrity, who have known Dr. Griswold for a quarter of a century, believe that there is no act of his life, which, if truthfully investigated, would bring reproach upon his memory.

BLUFFDALE.