inent men. Sometime in November,
1845, it copied from the "Columbian Magazine" of New York, a rather
adventurous article of mine, called "Mesmeric Revelation." It had the
impudence, also, to spoil the title by improving it to "The Last
Conversation of a Somnambule"--a phrase that is nothing at all to the
purpose, since the person who "converses" is _not_ a somnambule. He is
a sleep-waker--_not_ a sleep-walker; but I presume that "The Record"
thought it was only the difference of an _l_. What I chiefly complain
of, however, is that the London editor prefaced my paper with these
words:--"The following is an article communicated to the Columbian
Magazine, a journal of respectability and influence in the United
States, by Mr. Edgar A. Poe. _It bears internal evidence of
authenticity._"!

There is no subject under heaven about which funnier ideas are, in
general, entertained than about this subject of internal evidence. It
is by "internal evidence," observe, that we decide upon the mind.

But to "The Record:"--On the issue of my "Valdemar Case," this journal
copies it, as a matter of course, and (also as a matter of course)
improves the title, as in the previous instance. But the editorial
comments may as well be called profound. Here they are:

"The following narrative appears in a recent number of
_The American Magazine_, a respectable periodical in
the United States. It comes, it will be observed, from
the narrator of the 'Last Conversation of a
Somnambule,' published in The Record of the 29th of
November. In extracting this case the _Morning Post_ of
Monday last, takes what it considers the safe side, by
remarking--'For our own parts we do not believe it; and
there are several statements made, more especially with
regard to the disease of which the patient died, which
at once prove the case to be either a fabrication, or
the work of one little acquainted with consumption. The
story, however, is wonderful, and we therefore give
it.' The editor, however, does not point out the
especial statements which are inconsistent with what we
know of the progress of consumption, and as few
scientific persons would be willing to take their
pathology any more than their logic from the _Morning
Post_, his caution, it is to be feared, will not have
much weight. The reason assigned by the Post for
publishing the account is quaint