CAXTON MEMORIAL.
The inquiries addressed to me by Mr. BOLTON CORNEY in your paper of the 15th of November appear to amount to this:—Whether the whole or part of the expense of his proposed volume will be defrayed out of the fund appropriated to the Caxton Memorial? To this question, so far as my own information extends, I can only give a negative reply. The Society of Arts, in compliance with a request preferred to them by the subscribers at their last meeting, have accepted the charge of the Caxton Fund; and it is sufficient, for my present purpose, to state that negociations are now in progress between the Council and the Dean and Chapter, for liberty to erect a suitable memorial within the precincts of Westminster to the memory of William Caxton. This is as it should be; the memorial, be it what it may, statue, obelisk or fountain, or even a niche in a wall, should be substantial and enduring, calculated to remind the passing stranger that within the precincts of Westminster, William Caxton first exercised in England the art of printing. This circumstance forms one of those epochs in the history of civilisation which deserve public commemoration; and any memorial of Caxton should be placed as near as possible to the scene of his literary labours.
Mr. BOLTON CORNEY says, that I seem to regard his project with somewhat less of disfavour. Now I do not wish to be misunderstood. As a substitute for the Caxton Memorial, originally proposed at the great meeting over which the Earl of Carlisle presided, I am disposed to reject it altogether, for reasons which I have already stated in your columns. But as a literary undertaking I am willing to give it a fair consideration upon its own merits. The apothegm that a man's best monument consists in his own works, is capable of considerable modification from the nature of the works themselves. In the case before us, I believe the interest felt by the public in the works of Caxton to be too limited to justify the republication of his collected works. The proposal which Mr. CORNEY makes for a selection from those works, with a new life of the author, and a glossary, the latter proving how much they are out of date, is much more feasible than his original plan. There is a Caxton Society which has already issued several publications, and whose usefulness would be materially increased by such a publication as that suggested by Mr. CORNEY, if the Society to which he alludes (the Camden, I presume) should not be disposed to undertake it. The true object of these and similar societies is the production of books of interest and value, which are not sufficiently popular to justify a bookseller, or an individual, in incurring the pecuniary risk of their separate publication. Mr. CORNEY's literary memorial of Caxton appears to me to come under this head, and as such might be properly undertaken by any of the clubs or societies formed for the cultivation of early English literature. He might perhaps more easily attain the object of his wishes in this manner than by that which he has hitherto pursued. When a selection is to be made from the works of any author, much will depend upon the taste and discretion of the editor. Now I gather from Mr. CORNEY's letter, that he is fully prepared to undertake that office himself; and I may be permitted to add that his scrupulous accuracy and unwearied diligence afford the best guarantee that the work will be executed in such a manner as to fully satisfy the public interest in Caxton, and to form a graceful and appropriate tribute to the illustrious father of the English press.
BERIAH BOTFIELD.
Norton Hall, Jan. 3. 1852.