I have said that Natural Selection is to the structure of organised beings what the human architect is to a building.

The very existence of the human architect shows the existence of more general laws; but no one, in giving credit for a building to the human architect, thinks it necessary to refer to the laws by which man has appeared.
No astronomer, in showing how the movements of planets are due to gravity, thinks it necessary to say that the law of gravity was designed that the planets should pursue the courses which they pursue.

I cannot believe that there is a bit more interference by the Creator in the construction of each species than in the course of the planets.

It is only owing to Paley and Co., I believe, that this more special interference is thought necessary with living bodies.

But we shall never agree, so do not trouble yourself to answer.
I should think your remarks were very just about mathematicians not being better enabled to judge of probabilities than other men of common-sense.
I have just got more returns about the gestation of hounds.