From Asa Gray [10 January 1860]1
Copy-right.2 And it may be useful, since it is largely occupied with a defence of you against Agassiz—who has been helping the circulation of your book by denouncing it as atheistical in a public lecture!3 I suspect, also, he means to attack it in the Atlantic Monthly.4 The book annoys him; and I suppose the contrast I run between his theories and yours will annoy him still more.5
Ever since I read your book I have been busy—absorbed—in a review of it—no easy job, I tell you.— It is only half written now, and is too long, & the printer will want the MSS. this week. So I must hurry up the close.6 Lose no time, but send me over a lot of new matter.7
Wyman—the best of judges—& no convert, but much struck with it;—says your book is “thundering able”,—“a thoroughly scientific & philosophical work”.8 〈section missing〉
There are more very strong points made than I can mention here,—but 2 or 3 great gaps in the evidence—some of them you frankly admit,—the others I suppose you do not feel to be as important as I do— I will mention them hereafter— No time now.
Ever dear Darwin | Yours sincerely | Asa Gray
Agassiz denounces Origin as "atheistical";
AG is currently reviewing it [in Am. J. Sci. 2d ser. 29 (1860): 153–84].
Jeffries Wyman praises it, though not a convert.