Text: John C. Miller, ed., “Entry 014: ‘More New Facts about Edgar Allan Poe,’ by John H. Ingram, Feb. 21, 1874,” Poe's Helen Remembers (1979), pp. 47-55 (This material is protected by copyright)

[page 47, continued:]

14. “More New Facts about Edgar Allan Poe,” by John H. Ingram, London Mirror; A Weekly Magazine and Review of Literature, the Drama, Science and Art, Feb. 21, 1874. Item 570

More New Facts about Edgar Allan Poe

LOGICALLY SPEAKING a chain is no stronger than its weakest link; and, acting upon this truth, we are justified in regarding the whole of Griswold's “Memoir of Edgar Poe” with doubt, if we discover a single falsehood, or one evidently wilful misstatement. How much stronger, then, is our case for the defence if we are enabled to show — as well as lapse of time and distance from sources of investigation will permit — that nearly all the accusations brought against the deceased poet by his biographer can be proved to be utterly false, or gross perversions of the truth.

Although a very large number of names are introduced into the “Memoir” by Griswold, as if to set at rest any doubt as to its correctness, upon careful analysis they are, almost invariably, discovered to be either those of people who died before the work was published, or of persons totally foreign to the purpose. In one instance — that of Mr. George R. Graham — Griswold was too hasty. Mr. Graham was not dead, nor was he to be cowed into silence by the American Zoilos, and he protested against the “Memoir,” the only source of every biography of Edgar Poe yet published in England.

The first stumbling-block we encounter is the date of the poet's birth. Griswold, in the “Memoir,” and every other biographist copying him, says that Poe was born in January, 1811, although elsewhere he avers that the poet wrote to correct this into 1813. We disbelieve that correction, the more especially as we have the subject of the “Memoir's” own authority for stating that he was born in 1809, a far more probable date. Edgar accompanied his adopted parents, Mr. and Mrs. Allan, to England in 1816, and, after passing five years in the Manor House School, Churchstreet, Stoke Newington, returned to the United States in 1822. In his twelfth year he entered an academy at Richmond, Virginia, and here he would seem to have studied until the close of 1825. His reverend biographer states that he only spent “a few months” there, and then “entered the University at Charlottesville, where he led a very dissipated life. The manners which then prevailed there were extremely dissolute, [page 48:] and he was known as the wildest and most reckless student of his class. ... His gambling, intemperance, and other vices, induced his expulsion from the university.” The mere fact that at this time Poe, on Griswold's showing, was but eleven years of age, should have made biographers careful about crediting such testimony. What were the real facts? Lying before us we have copies of two letters written in May, 1860 — one from Dr. Stephen Maupin, president of the university, and one from Mr. Wertenbecker, the secretary, which certify that Edgar Poe entered the university in February, 1826, and that he himself recorded his age in the matriculation book of his college as seventeen; that “he spent but one session, that of 1826, at the institution, and at no time did he fall under the censure of the Faculty;” and, it is added, “he was not at that time addicted to drinking.”

Instead of having been expelled, Edgar Poe left the university with the boyish idea of assisting the Greeks in their revolutionary movements against their Turkish oppressors. He left home in 1827. What he did in Europe, and how he did it, no one seems to know; but at the end of a twelvemonth he turned up at St. Petersburg, where, says the charitable. Griswold, “our minister was summoned one morning to save him from penalties incurred in a drunken debauch.” On turning to Dr. Lowell's notice of the poet, we find it stated that the poor orphan boy — he was but eighteen — “got into difficulties in St. Petersburg through want of a passport, from which he was rescued by the American consul, and sent home.” Other biographers tell a similar story,(1) as did even Griswold himself in his other works, whilst Powell remarks that Poe had a narrow escape in Russia “from the fangs of that brutal Government, in consequence of an irregularity in his passport. The exertions of the consul saved him from the consequences of the error, and through his friendship he returned to America.”

On his return home the young poet wished to enter the army, and Mr. Allan procured his adopted son an appointment to a scholarship in the Military Academy at West Point. Before the young cadet had passed a twelvemonth at West Point he received the unwelcome intelligence of his adopted father's second marriage with a girl young enough to be her husband's granddaughter. Reverting to the “Memoir,” we find Griswold, indeed, remarking that “it has been erroneously stated by all Poe's biographers that Mr. Allan was now sixty-five years of age, and that Miss Paterson, to whom he was married afterwards, was young enough to be his granddaughter. Mr. Allan was in his forty-eighth year, and the difference between his age and that of his second wife was not so great as justly to attract any observation.” Many might deem a sufficient reply to this statement to be found in the following paragraph of the famous [page 49:] “Ludwig”-Griswold letter to the Tribune. “Mr. Allan,” it remarks, “was sixty-five years of age, and the lady was young.” The author of the “Eulogium,” who lived in the same city with Mr. Allan, gives his age as sixty-five at the date of the second marriage, and he is corroborated by Powell.

In 1827, Poe, when barely eighteen, had published a volume of poems, including “Al Aaraaf,” “Tamerlane,” and other shorter pieces, some of which, as “Poems Written in Youth,” are still reprinted verbatim, whilst others are totally ignored, or, having been recast, are to be found in the later collections, under new titles. Two years later a second edition,(2) or collection rather, was published, and in 1830 the third edition, “revised and improved.” The author of the “Memoir,” although thoroughly conversant with these dates, declares that “this small volume of verse” was not printed until after Poe left West Point, in 1831, following in this statement the writer of the “Eulogium;” “and,” continues the reverend gentleman, “I believe there is no evidence that anything of his, which has been published, was written before he left the university.”

Notwithstanding this accurate biographist's belief, we are able to state that not only was Poe correct in the dates he furnished Griswold with, but that that gentleman himself has left the “evidence” he attempted to ignore. On the thirty-seventh page of the “Memoir” he gives 1829 as the original date of the publication, whilst elsewhere, during the poet's lifetime, and as lately as in the pseudonymous letter to the Tribune, he quotes 1827! In fact, in his eagerness to depreciate the poet's abilities, he frequently defeats his object, and only manifests his own inveterate hatred towards him. Were such errors, however, merely the results of carelessness, they would deteriorate from the value of the book as an authority, and should make us hesitate about placing implicit faith in its author's statements. Lowell, in his notice of Edgar Poe, published in Graham's Magazine, and the Countess d’Ossoli (Margaret Fuller) in the Tribune, both, and both more reliable authorities, give 1827 as the date of the first publication; and the latter states that some of these poems were composed when their author was eight or ten years old. Poe himself says that he wrote “Al Aaraaf” when he was only ten. Probably no one cares to know that in the opinion of the impartial Griswold these “verses do not seem to evince, all things considered, a very remarkable precosity.” Margaret Fuller thought otherwise, as did also James Hannay. Lowell calls them “the most remarkable boyish poems that we have ever read. We know of none that can compare with them for maturity of purpose, and a nice understanding of the effects of language and metre. ... John Neal himself, a man of genius, and whose lyre has been too long capriciously silent, appreciated the high merit of these and similar passages, and drew a proud horoscope for their author.” [page 50:]

Page by page, and paragraph after paragraph of his so-called “Memoir” have we sifted and put to the touchstone of truth, and testimony after testimony have we succeeded in obtaining of the falsity or improbability of its author's allegations against Edgar Poe; but having proceeded thus far in our investigations, we must forego a system that would require a whole number of the Mirror to work out thoroughly, and henceforth only draw attention to one or two of the more glaring discrepancies between the real facts of the case and the fictitious ones of Rufus Griswold.

In 1833, poor Poe having, upon the strength of his poetical successes, adopted literature for a profession, is found to have been literally starving. A local paper having offered two prizes for the best tale and the best poem, both prizes were awarded to Poe, on account, Griswold positively affirms, of his beautiful and distinct caligraphy. One of the adjudicators, having been attracted by Poe's handwriting, selected his papers for the premium, avers the biographer, and thereupon “it was unanimously decided that the prizes should be paid to ‘the first of geniuses who had written legibly.’ Not another Ms. was unfolded.” Everybody appears to have accepted this story, and never to have doubted that a committee, including the Honourable J. P. Kennedy and other well-known persons, should have hesitated at such a dishonourable course of proceeding. Fortunately for the credit of all concerned we are enabled to disprove the entire story, having succeeded in unearthing the published award. We therein read that “Amongst the prose articles were many of various and distinguished merit; but the singular force and beauty of those sent by the author of ‘The Tales of the Folio Club’ leave us no room for hesitation. ... We have accordingly awarded the premium to a tale entitled ‘The Ms. Found in a Bottle.’ It would hardly be doing justice to the writer of this collection to say that the tale we have chosen is the best of the six offered by him. We cannot refrain from saying that the author owes it to his own reputation, as well as to the gratification of the community, to publish the entire volume. These tales are eminently distinguished by a wild, vigorous, and poetical imagination, a rich style, a fertile invention, and varied and curious learning.” Then follow the signatures of the committee. That Griswold had read this award is morally certain, as he even refers to its terms.

Professors Anthon, Henry, and Hawkes having offered Poe a more advantageous engagement on the New York Review, he, in January, 1837, resigned the editorship of the Southern Literary Messenger, the circulation of which high-priced magazine had, during the one year of his clever supervision, increased from seven hundred to nearly five thousand. According to the “Memoir,” however, Poe's severance from the Messenger was caused by his irregularities; his continual drunkenness having “frequently interrupted the kindness, and finally exhausted [page 51:] the patience, of his generous though methodical employer,” the late Mr. White. Griswold then quotes the editor's valedictory address; but suppresses the proprietor's note which follows it, and which could not fail to create a doubt as to the authenticity of a letter purporting to have been written by this late Mr. White to Poe, and quoted in the “Memoir” to the effect that “all engagements on my part cease the moment you get drunk.” Mr. White, after alluding to the able manner in which Poe had performed his editorial duties during the past year, during which period, indeed, he had monthly written the chief portion of the magazine, and adds, “Mr. Poe, however, will continue to furnish its columns, from time to time, with the effusions of his vigorous and popular pen,” &c. And Poe did write for the Messenger until a few weeks before his death.

About this time Poe wrote “Arthur Gordon Pym.” Says his editor: “It is his longest work, and is not without some sort of merit, but it received little attention. The publishers sent one hundred copies to England, and being mistaken at first for a narrative of real experience, it was advertised to be reprinted, but a discovery of its character, I believe, prevented such a result.” We have already had examples of this reverend gentleman's belief, and are not, therefore surprised to find that it was twice reprinted within a very short space of time in England.

In May, 1839, Poe, after having been for some time a contributor to, became editor of the Gentleman's Magazine, belonging to the late Mr. Burton, a well-known comedian. The account given by the “Memoir” is that Poe held this post until June, 1840; that Mr. Burton would willingly have retained him in his editorial position, but that “he was so unsteady of purpose and unreliable that the actor was never sure when he left the city that his business would be cared for. On one occasion, returning after the regular day of publication, he found the number unfinished, and Poe incapable of duty.” The very good-natured proprietor, however, so runs this legend, “prepared the necessary copy himself, published the magazine, and was proceeding with arrangements for another month when he received a letter from his assistant, of which the tone may be inferred from the answer,” which answer, as its quoted by Griswold, apparently does not contain a single allusion to its recipient's presumed drunkenness; but whilst differing from Poe's supposed views of criticising, advises him, as his troubles have given a morbid tone to his feelings, to “use more exercise, write when feelings prompt, and be assured of my friendship.” So Poe continue in his editorial office for several more months when, taking advantage of Mr. Burton's prolonged absence, says this reliable “Memoir,” he obtains lists of the magazine subscribers; prepares the prospectus of a new monthly to supplant the Gentleman's; and when encountered by “his associate late in the evening, at one of his accustomed haunts,” in response to Mr. Burton's request to give him his manuscripts, responds: “Who are you that presume to address me in [page 52:] this manner? Burton, I am — the editor — of the Penn Magazine — and you are — hiccup — a fool!” “Of course this ended his relations with the Gentleman's,” gravely adds Griswold. Unfortunately for the reverend biographer's veracity, it did nothing of the sort! Whether this ridiculous anecdote was evolved out of the imagination of the “Memoir's” author, or was really told to him by one of the mischief-makers who, he acknowledges, continually sowed dissension between Poe and himself, we know not, but its disproof is found in the fact that Poe retained his editorial post for two years longer, during which time the Gentleman's passed into the hands of Mr. George R. Graham, and, under the title of Graham's Magazine, became one of the best — if not the best — magazine in America.

Poe continued for more than two years — not eighteen months, as stated by Griswold — the editorial guidance of Graham's Magazine, and the value of his services may be gathered from the fact that during this period its circulation rose from five to fifty-two thousand. Turning to the “Memoir,” its author tells us that “the infirmities which induced his separation from Mr. White and from Mr. Burton at length compelled Mr. Graham to seek for another editor.” Another editor was found in the person of Rufus W. Griswold, and it is interesting to learn, on the authority of Duyckinck's “Cyclopedia of American Literature,” that he conducted it with great success, in consequence of obtaining “the contributions of some of the best authors of the country, who found liberal remuneration, then a novelty in American literature, from the generous policy of the proprietor.” The very first man to deny the truth of Griswold's characterization of Poe was George R. Graham. He designated it as “The fancy sketch of a jaundiced vision” — “an immortal infamy,” and, probably knowing better than any man the position in which the two authors stood to each other, declared that there existed “a long, intense, and implacable hatred between Poe and Griswold, which disqualified him for the office of his biographer!” All that Griswold could reply was that Mr. Graham's letter was “sophomorical and trashy,” “poor fustian,” its writer, his late employer, “a silly and ambitious person,” and, in italics, the audacious remark that for “four or five years not a line by Poe was purchased for Graham's Magazine” — that is to say, whilst he (Griswold) was the editor! Such a piece of impudence is, probably, unparalleled in the history of literature, unless, indeed, our next sample of his skill does not surpass it.

In May, 1846, Poe commenced a series of critiques on the “New York Literati,” in Godey's Lady's Book. They were immensely successful, but the caustic style of some of them produced terrible commotion in the ranks of mediocrity, as may be learnt from the proprietor's notes to his readers, respecting the anonymous and other letters he receives concerning them. “We are not to be intimidated,” he remarks, “by a threat [page 53:] of the loss of friends, or turned from our purpose by honied words. Our course is onwards. ... Many attempts have been made and are making by various persons to forestall public opinion. We have the name of one person. Others are busy with reports of Mr. Poe's illness. Mr. Poe has been ill, but we have letters from him of very recent dates, also a new batch of the ‘Literati,’ which show anything but feebleness either of body or mind. Amost [[Almost]] every paper that we exchange with has praised our new enterprise, and spoken in high terms of Mr. Poe's opinion.” A Dunn English, or Dunn Brown, for he is duplicately named, dissatisfied with the manner in which his literary shortcomings had been reviewed by Poe, “retaliated in a personal newspaper article,” says Duyckinck, and “the communication was reprinted in the Evening Mirror, in New York, whereupon Poe instituted a libel suit against that journal, and recovered several hundred dollars.” Griswold's account is that Dunn English “chose to evince his resentment of the critic's unfairness by the publication of a card in which he painted strongly the infirmities of Poe's life and character.” “Poe's article,” he continues, “was entirely false in what purported to be its facts. The statement of Dr. English appeared in the New York Mirror of the 23rd June and on the 27th.(3) 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 the biographer, “to a disgraceful quarrel,” and to the “premature conclusion” of the “Literati.” This review of English, alias Brown, appeared in the second or June number of the “Literati,” and from our knowledge of Griswold's usual inaccuracy, we were not surprised to find, upon reference, that the sketches ran their stipulated course until October, and, after that date, Poe still continuing a contributor to the Lady's Book, but what did startle us was to discover that the whole of the personalities of the supposed critique by Poe on English, as included in the collection edited by Griswold, were absent from the real critique published in the Lady's Book. It is impossible to reproduce the whole of this audacious fabrication, or its prototype, 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 sceptical that, since the days of Ireland or Psalmanazar, no more shameless imposition has apparently been foisted on the public. “Brief poems” are changed into “scraps of verse.” “Barry Cornwall and others of the bizarre school are his especial favourites” 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’ [page 54:] 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 personal, 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 well as some other portions of equal coarseness, are absent from Poe's critique.

But the grossest accusation which his biographer brings against Poe is the oft-told incident of his engagement to be married to “one of the most brilliant women of New England,” and the method adopted by the poet of breaking the engagement, “which,” says Griswold, “affords a striking illustration of his character.” According to the veracious author of the “Memoir,” Poe, in the evening before what should have been the bridal morn, committed such drunken outrages at the house of his affianced bride, that it was found necessary to summon the police to eject him, which, of course, ended the engagement. This misstatement being brought under the notice of the parties concerned, Mr. William Pabodie, of Providence, Rhode Island, wrote a direct and specific denial of it to the New York Tribune, and that paper published it on the 7th June, 1852. “I am authorized to say,” remarks Mr. Pabodie, “not only from my personal knowledge, but also from the statement of ALL who were conversant with the affair, that there exists not a shadow of foundation for the story above alluded to.” The same letter goes on to state that its writer knew Poe well, and at the time alluded to “was with him daily. I was acquainted with the circumstances of his engagement, and with the causes which led to its dissolution,” continues Mr. Pabodie, and he concludes his letter with an earnest appeal to Griswold to do all that lies in his power “to remove an undeserved stigma from the memory of the departed.” An honourable man would have confessed the incorrectness of his information, and have done his best to obviate the consequences. Not so the rev. gentleman — he wrote a savage letter to Mr. Pabodie, threatening if he did not withdraw his he would take a dreadful revenge. Mr. Pabodie did not withdraw, but in another letter to Griswold brought [page 55:] forward incontrovertible proofs of other falsifications indulged in by the author of the “Memoir,” who henceforth remained discreetly silent.

This disgraceful affair needs no further comment. We have not the space or we could continue our exposé. The incredulous reader may find the publications we have named in the British Museum Library,(4) and all the charges against the victim of Griswold's insatiable malice, we are prepared to prove to the world, as we have proved to our own satisfaction, are as unfounded as they are cruel and dastardly.

As regards his estimate of Poe's genius, were he even an impartial witness, it would go for naught. The world has judged for itself, nor cares that Rufus Griswold can only perceive “ingenuity” and “art” in the poems, “dexterity in the dissection of sentences” in the critiques, or deems that “the analytical subtlety has frequently been over-estimated” of the tales of Edgar Poe.(5)

John H. Ingram

[[Footnotes]]

[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 48:]

1. The “Eulogium” confesses its inability to state whether “lust or lucre” was the cause of his detention.

[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 49:]

2. “Poems.” Baltimore: Hatch and Dunning, 1829.

[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 54:]

3. This number, strange to relate, has either been abstracted from or never bound up with the file of this newspaper in the British Museum Library.

[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 55:]

4. Godey's Lady's Book, and the “Literati,” by Edgar A. Poe.

5. In taking leave of this subject for the present, it is but just that we should tender our hearty thanks to Mrs. Sarah H. Whitman, the never faltering friend of the deceased poet, for her kind assistance in furnishing us with evidence towards the elucidation of Poe's university career, and the date of his birth.