Text: John C. Miller, ed., “Entry 142: John H. Ingram to Sarah Helen Whitman, Mar. 14, 1876,” Poe's Helen Remembers (1979), pp. 402-404 (This material is protected by copyright)

[page 402, continued:]

142. John H. Ingram to Sarah Helen Whitman

My dear Friend,

Yours of the 29th Ultimo, just received, shows that you have not yet received mine of the 14th Ultimo. I trust it has now reached you safely and that you have forgiven if you cannot ever forget.

You will see by the enclosed rough proof what my “Rejoinder” to Gill is.(1) I do not think, unless you had the whole correspondence which has passed under my eyes, that you can fully comprehend how utterly despicable this Gill is. Apart from other sources, the communications Mr. Widdleton has forwarded me show his true nature — a portion of the correspondence which I must return (although not asked for) to Mr. Widdleton, I forward to you, as I do not think I break any confidence [page 403:] in so doing. The papers were sent me by Widdleton without any stipulation. Kindly forward them to their proper address (i.e., Widdleton's).

You are mistaken in deeming that Gill was irritated at my forestalling him with your information — in his last letter to me he expressed the hope that I should be able to make use of the Gowans &c. testimony! I should never have heard anything publicly of his claims had Mr. Widdleton not declined his offer to write a “Memoir” of Poe for his edition of Poe's works. Mr. W[iddleton] is now thoroughly disgusted with Gill & although still doubting what my attitude might be, wrote to the New York Evening Post a letter apologizing for having given, as if with my sanction, publicity to Gill's claim. He is now reprinting the “Memoir” for the 4-vol. edition of the works, & has sent me the first proof for revision — if he follows out my corrections he will greatly enhance the value of the life.(2)

I have already told you that the 1827 volume has reached my hands, but this I wish kept quiet pro tem. It was printed but not published, & to me is, from a biographical point of view, the most interesting of his vols. You will hear fully of it ere long.

Pray let us dismiss this Gill affair for all eternity & be as we were of yore. I have been very unwell — the thought of being regarded by you merely as an instrument to be used for a purpose & then cast aside broke me down utterly. You must bear somewhat with me. I have suffered such mental torments in my short life as few mortals undergo & remain sane. I clung to your friendship as a sheet anchor and then, the utterly heartless way in which you seemed to regard me wrung my heart. But enough! Forgive & forget.

As regards Gill, he sees that he cannot expect you to shield his falsehoods & misrepresentations. Pray do not be drawn into a correspondence with him. To you, I need scarcely repeat that I never gave him the slightest reason to believe that I would not publish in America.

I sent copy of my “Rejoinder” to the American Bookseller, where, I believe, Gill's “Reply” was first sent, but a copy sent to a printer for a few proofs got lost, & has only just turned up. I enclose you one. I cannot help feeling that this touching “pitch” does not improve my own feelings, or other people's — it is unworthy of my aims — & unless Gill does something very outrageous I shall drop the subject now. Just note the amusing way in which he alludes, however, to Ingram being only a “clerk in a public office” — are Americans generally so ignorant of our social institutions, or is Gill only presuming on Widdleton's ignorance? It is a well-known fact that our leading scientific & literary men are in the Civil Service, for instance, Sir R. Airey, Herschell, Professor Owen, Sir Arthur Helps, W. Rossetti, are or were in Civil [page 404:] Service. Anthony Trollope & E. Yates were in the same Dept. as myself. A clerkship in our Civil Service is permanent, & is indicative of a certain amount of influence & education.(3)

You know Horne's works of course? “Orion,” &c.? He is a noble old fellow & has just published a revised edition of Cosmo. I will send you a copy next mail day. If you care to publish any remarks in the P[rovidence] Journal, Horne will be glad to see them. He has one weakness — he does not like to be deemed too old! It is nearly 50 years ago since first edition of Cosmo.

Reverting to our own subject: can you give any suggestions as to the origin of “The Raven” other than those contained in “The Philosophy of Composition”? Do you know when or where “El Dorado” was published, prior to Poe's death?(4) “For Annie,” I believe, you have answered. I wish someone would give me a list of Poe's contributions to Graham's Magazine, Vols. 18, 21, up to 1850, & of those to The Gift, 1831-1850. Are they in your Athenaeum? I think you have looked?

I shall tell Widdleton that I have sent his Gill correspondence per you, as “I wished you to see it.” It follows on Thursday.

Ever yours,

 

1. Ingram's “Rejoinder” follows these notes.

2. See page 378, n. 4.

3. Ingram had received his commission in the British Civil Service in 1868. The birth certificate he had to furnish at that time led to my discovery that the date he gave to Who's Who, 1849, had to be false, for he could not have been commissioned at the age of nineteen. See my article “The Birthdate of John Henry Ingram,” Poe Studies, 7 (June 1974), 24.

4. In the Flag of Our Union, Apr. 21, 1849.