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. J. H. M.