The result of the appeals which have recently been made to the
sympathies of the present age for the purpose of erecting a
Memorial to our first Printer, and of restoring the crumbling tomb
of one of our earliest and greatest Poets, has gone near to prove
that the admirers of Caxton and Chaucer are disposed to yield to
the objects of their hero-worship little more than lip service. In
short, the plan for the Caxton Memorial, and that for the
restoration of Chaucer's Monument, have well nigh failed.
The projectors of the former had, indeed, in the necessity of
settling what the Caxton Memorial should be, to encounter, at the
very outset of their undertaking, one difficulty from which the
Chaucer Committee was free; and the uncertainty whether it should
assume the form of the symbolical "lamp and fountain" so
poetically suggested by the Dean of St. Paul's, or the ideal
cast-iron statue of the Coalbrook Dale Company, may have had a
sinister effect upon the Subscription List.
Between the suggestive symbol and the fancy portrait there would
seem to be little room for hesitation, since the former would
merely veil a truth, while the latter would perpetuate a
falsehood. But our readers have had before them a third, and, as
it seems to us, a far more reasonable proposal, in that made by
MR. BOLTON CORNEY for a collective impression of Caxton's original
compositions: and we cannot but think that if that gentleman will
take the trouble to enter into the necessary details as to the
extent of such compositions, and the expense of transcribing and
printing them, his scheme may yet be realised, and that too to the
satisfaction of all the subscribers to the Caxton Memorial. The
following communication indicates the favour with which MR.
CORNEY'S proposal will probably be received by the followers of
Caxton's art in this country.
I have just read with great pleasure the article on "A Caxton Memorial
suggested" in your Number for the 19th of July. I was particularly
pleased with the "_proposed conditions_;" and as an humble follower of
the art of which Caxton stands at the head, and as an enthusiastic
admirer of that great and talented, and learned printer, I should feel
great pleasure in becoming a subscriber, should anything of the kind be
undertaken; and have no doubt but that many,--aye, as many as might be
required to complete the subscription list, might be found among the
printers of this country, who would feel proud to subscribe to such a
"Memorial." If anything of the kind should be undertaken, the projectors
might depend upon me becoming a subscriber.
HENRY RYLETT, Printer.
Horncastle, Aug. 18. 1851.
The following letter, on the other hand, from a correspondent
whose smallest suggestion deserves, as it will be sure to receive,
the respectful attention of all who have the pleasure of knowing
his high personal character and great acquirements, although
pointing at what might be a fitting Memorial of one of the
greatest of the Worthies of Westminster, clearly indicates that if
MR. CORNEY'S scheme can be carried out it will have the benefit of
the writer's encouragement and support:
MR. BOLTON CORNEY'S letter is entitled to much attention. It is
satisfactory to learn that the original design has been abandoned. The
fountain and the illumination might be a very pretty idea, but it would
have sorely puzzled some of our countrymen to connect that memorial in
their minds with the name and services of the first English printer.
Might not the funds that were raised be advantageously employed in
founding a Caxton scholarship at Westminster School; or in the building
or enlarging some school bearing Caxton's name, connected with
Westminster? The spiritual wants of that city are great.
If the statue be raised, which should not present a _bonâ fide_
resemblance to our celebrated printer, it would be worse than
valueless--something like an imposture and it would have as little
connexion with Caxton as the statue in St. Peter's bears to the great
Apostle, though called by his name.
MR. CORNEY'S proposal, of giving an impression of Caxton's original
compositions, would unquestionably be his most enduring and glorious
monument. These reprints would be dear, not only to the bibliographer,
but to the philologist and men of letters generally. But the work would
be an expensive one, and the editors should be far more liberally
recompensed than by merely receiving a limited number of copies. As the
subscription would probably be very limited, the work should be
undertaken by the nation, and not by individuals; still, the funds
already raised, if not otherwise expended for educational purposes, as
before suggested, would serve as the foundation for accomplishing MR.
CORNEY'S excellent suggestion.