Jan. 17. 1852.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



51 



ment) by the intricacy of its divisions. Here 

 again we must recur for an example to the Ger- 

 mans, who sometimes make the compartments of 

 their writings as numerous as a series of Chinese 

 boxes all fitted into each other. First, there is 

 the part, then the book, then the chapter, then the 

 section, then the article, and then the paragraph, 

 which is itself subdivided into paragraphs with 

 Roman numerals and Arabic numerals ; and these 

 again are further subdivided into paragraphs with 

 Roman letters, and Gi-eek letters, and sometimes 

 Hebrew letters. To refer to a work divided in 

 this manner by any other means than the volume 

 and page, is a labour of as hopeless intricacy as it 

 is to follow the logical cascade down its successive 

 platforms. 



It is a considerable convenience where the book 

 or chapter is marked at the head or margin of the 

 page ; and in histories, or historical memoirs, 

 chronological notation is very convenient. 



In general no book (not being a book arranged 

 in alphabetical order, as a dictionary, encyclopedia, 

 &c.) ought to be printed without a table of contents. 

 The trouble to the author of making a table of 

 •contents is very small, and the expense to the 

 publisher in printing it is in general imperceptible. 

 Modern English books rarely sin in this respect ; 

 foreign books, however, both French and German, 

 are frequently wanting in a table of contents. The 

 invaluable collection of the fragments of Greek 

 historians lately published in Didot's Series — a 

 work indispensable to every critical student of 

 ancient history — has no table of contents, referring 

 to the pages, prefixed to each volume. The Poetce 

 Scenici Graci of Dindorf is without a table of 

 contents ; and a similar want is a serious drawback 

 to the use of the cheap and portable edition of the 

 Greek and Latin classics published by Tauchnitz 

 at Leipsic. 



Lastly, an index adds materially to the value of 

 every work which contains numerous and miscel- 

 laneous facts. The preparation of a good index 

 is a laborious and sometimes costly task ; the 

 printing of it, moi'eover, adds to the price of the 

 book. Many of the indexes to the English law- 

 books are models of this species of labour ; tlie in- 

 dexes to the Parliamentary Reports are likewise 

 prepared with great cai-e and intelligence. Even 

 a meagre index, however, is better than no 

 index at all ; and where the publisher's means, 

 and the demand for the book, do not admit of the 

 preparation of a copious index of subjects, an 

 alphabetical list of names of persons and places 

 would often be an acceptable present to the reader 

 of an historical or scientific work. L. 



CAXTON MEMOKIAL. 



The inquiries addressed to me by Mr. Bolton 

 CoKNEY 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 com- 

 pliance 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 pre- 

 cincts of Westminster, William Caxton first exer- 

 cised in England the art of printing. This cir- 

 cumstance forms one of those epochs in the history 

 of civilisation which deserve public commemora- 

 tion; and any memorial of Caxton should be 

 placed as near as possible to the scene of his 

 literary labours. 



Mr. Bolton Cornet says, that T seem to regard 

 his project with somewhat less of disfavour. Now 

 I do not wish to be misunderstood. As a substi- 

 tute for the Caxton Memorial, originally proposed 

 at the great meeting over which the Earl of Car- 

 lisle 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 republica- 

 tion of his collected works. The proposal which 

 Mr. CoBNEY makes for a selection from those 

 works, with a new life of the author, and a glos- 

 sary, 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 suf- 

 ficiently popular to justify a booksellei-, or an 

 individual, in incurring the pecuniary risk of their 

 separate publication. Mr. Cobney's literary me- 

 morial of Caxton appears to me to come under 

 this head, and as such might be properly under- 

 taken by any of the clubs or societies formed for the 

 cultivation of early English literature. He might 



