[59] While most physicians lay too great stress on the factor of infection, this mistake is by no means universal. Maurice Fishberg, for example (quoted in the _Medical Review of Reviews_, XXII, 8, August, 1916) states: "For many years the writer was physician to a charitable society, having under his care annually 800 to 1,000 consumptives who lived in poverty and want, in overcrowded tenements, having all opportunities to infect their consorts; in fact most of the consumptives shared their bed with their healthy consorts. Still, very few cases were met with in which tuberculosis was found in both the husband and wife. Widows, whose husbands died from phthisis, were only rarely seen to develop the disease." [60] In 9th Trans. of _American Association for the Study and Prevention of Tuberculosis_, p. 117. [61] _Geographical and Historical Pathology_ (New Sydenham Society, 1883), Vol. III, p. 266. [62] Reid, G. Archdall, _The Present Evolution of Man_, and _The Laws of Heredity_. [63] _In the South Seas,_ p. 27; quoted by G. Archdall Reid, _The Principles of Heredity_ (New York, 1905), p. 183. Dr. Reid has discussed the role of disease and alcohol on the modern evolution of man more fully than any other writer. [64] See, for example, John West's _History of Tasmania_, Vol. II, Launceston, Tasmania, 1852. [65] See Hollingworth, H. L., _Vocational Psychology_, p. 170, New York, 1916. [66] Net increase here refers only to the first year of life, and was computed by deducting the deaths under one year, in a ward, from the number of births in the same ward for the same year. For details of this study of the Pittsburgh vital statistics, see the _Journal of Heredity_, Vol. VIII, pp. 178-183 (April, 1917). [67] Quoted from Newsholme and Stevenson, _The Decline of Human Fertility_, London, 1906. [68] Heron, David, _On the Relation of Fertility in Man to Social Status_, London, 1906. The account is quoted from Schuster, Edgar, _Eugenics_, pp. 220-221, London, 1913. [69] _Ztschft. f. Sozialwissenschaft,_ VII (1904), pp. 1 ff. [70] Two of the best known of these tribes are the "Jukes" and "Nams." "An analysis of the figures of the Jukes in regard to the birth-rate shows that of a total of 403 married Juke women, 330 reproduced one or more children and 73 were barren. The average fecundity, counting those who are barren, is 3.526 children per female. The 330 women having children have an average fecundity of 4.306 as compared with that of 4.025, based on 120 reproducing women in the Nam family."--Estabrook, A. H., _The Jukes in 1915_, p. 51, Washington, Carnegie Institution, 1916. [71] Woods, Frederick Adams, _Heredity in Royalty_, New York, 1906.