Mr. POE, which appeared in that paper with the telegraphic communication of his death; and two or three of these paragraphs having been quoted by Mr. N.P. WILLIS, in his Notice of Mr. POE, were as a part of that Notice unavoidably reprinted in the volume of the deceased author’s Tales. And my unconsidered and imperfect, but as every one who knew the subject readily perceived, very kind article, was now vehemently attacked. A writer under the signature of “GEORGE R. GRAHAM,” in a sophomorical and trashy but widely circulated Letter, denounced, it as “the fancy sketch of a jaundiced vision,” “an immortal infamy,” and its composition as a “breach of trust.” And to excuse his five months’ silence, and to induce a belief that he did not KNOW that what I had written was already published before I COULD have been advised that I was to be Mr. POE’s executor, (a condition upon which all the possible force of his Letter depends,) this silly and ambitious person, while represented as entertaining a friendship really passionate in its tenderness for the poor author, (of whom in four years of his extremest poverty he had not purchased for his magazine a single line,) is made to say that in half a year he had not seen so noticeable an article, — though within a week after Mr. POE’s death it appeared in “The Tribune,” in “The Home Journal,” in three of the daily papers of his own city, and in “The Saturday Evening Post,” of which he was or had been himself one of the chief proprietors and editors! And Mr. JOHN NEAL, too, who had never had even the slightest personal acquaintance with POE in his life, rushes from a sleep which the public had trusted was eternal, to declare that my characterization of POE (which he is pleased to describe as “poetry, exhalted poetry, poetry of astonishing and original strength”) is false and malicious, and that I am a “calumniator,” a “Rhadamanthus,” etc. Both these writers — JOHN NEAL following the author of the Letter signed “GEORGE R. GRAHAM” — not only assume what I have shown to be false, (that the remarks on Poe’s character were written by me as his executor, ) but that there was a long, intense, and implacable emnity betwixt Poe and myself, which disqualified me for the office of his biographer. This scarcely needs an answer after the poet’s dying request that I should be his editor; but the manner in which it has been urged, will, I trust, be a sufficient excuse for the following demonstration of its absurdity.
My acquaintance with Mr. POE commenced in the spring of 1841. He called at my hotel, and not finding me at home, left two letters of introduction. The next morning I visited him, and we had a long conversation about literature and literary men, pertinent to the subject of a book, “The Poets and Poetry of America,” which I was then preparing for the press. The following letter was sent to me a few days afterwards:
PHILADELPHIA, March 29.
R.W. Griswold, Esq.: My Dear Sir: — On the other leaf I send such poems as I think my best, from which you can select any which please your fancy. I should be proud to see one or two of them in your book. The one called “The Haunted Palace” is that of Professor Longfellow’s plagiarism. I first published the “H.P.’’ in Brooks’s “Museum,” monthly journal at Baltimore, now dead. Afterwards, I embodied it in a tale called “The House of Usher,” in Burton’s magazine. Here it was, I suppose, that Professor Longfellow saw it; for about six weeks afterwards, there appeared in the “Southern Literary Messenger” a poem by him called “The Beleaguered City,” which may now be found in his volume. The identity in title is striking; for by “The Haunted Palace” I mean to imply a mind haunted by phantoms — a disordered brain — and by the “Beleaguered City” Prof. L. means just the same. But the whole tournure of the poem is based upon mine as you will see at once. Its allegorical conduct, the style of its versification and expression — all are mine. As I understood you to say that you meant to preface each set of poems by some biographical notice, I have ventured to send you