510 * ORIGIN ' AND ' TASMANIAN FLOEA ' 
Atlienaeum : November 21, 1859. 
Dear Darwin, — I am a sinner not to have written to 
you ere this, if only to thank you for your glorious book. 
What a mass of close reasoning on curious facts and fresh 
phenomena ; it is capitally written and will be very success- 
ful. I say this on the strength of two or three plunges into 
as mam^ chapters, for I have not yet attempted to read it. 
Lyell, with whom we are staying, is perfectly enchanted and 
is absolutely gloating over it. I must accept your compli- 
ment to me and acknowledgment of supposed assistance 
from me as the warm tribute of affection from an honest 
(though deluded) man, and furthermore accept it as very 
pleasing to my vanity — but; my dear fellow, neither my 
name, nor my judgment, nor my assistance deserved any 
such compliments, and if I am dishonest enough to be 
pleased with what I don't deserve, it must just pass. How 
different the hook reads from the MS. I see I shall 
have much to talk over with you. Those lazy printers 
have not finished my luckless Essay,^ which beside your 
book will look like a ragged handkerchief beside a Eoyal 
Standard. 
Kew : ( ? before December 14, 1859). 
Dear Darwin, — You have, I know, been drenched with 
letters since the publication of your book and I have hence 
forborne to add my mite. I hope that now you are well 
through Edition 11. , and I have heard that you were flourish- 
ing in London. I have not yet got half through the book, 
not from want of will, but of time — for it is the very hardest 
book to read to full profit that I ever tried ; it is so cram- 
full of matter and reasoning. I am all the more glad that 
you have published in this form, for the 3 vols., unpre- 
faced by this, would have choked any Naturahst of the 
XIX century and certainly have softened my brain in the 
operation of assimilating their contents. I am perfectly 
tired of marvelling at the wonderful amount of facts you 
have brought to bear, and your skill in marshalling them 
and throwing them on the enemy. It is also extremely 
clear as far as I have gone, but very hard to fully appreciate. 
Somehow it reads very different from the MS., and I often 
fancy that I must have been very stupid not to have more 
fully followed it in MS. Lyell told me of his criticisms. I 
^ The reprint. 
