r2 PEOCEEDIlSrGS OF THE XATIOiSTAL MUSEUM vol. 75 



LEPUS TOLAI SUBLUTEUS Thomas 



Lepuf! sicinhoei mblittcus Thomas, Abst. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1908. p. 45 

 (Southern Ordos Desert, Mongolia). 



Specimens. — Four: 20 miles Avest of Ningwiifu, Shansi, 2 (includ- 

 ing the type of Z. sowerhyae) ; and 12 miles south of Yenanfu, 

 Shensi, 2, 



Thomas (1908) was correct in stating that hares indistinguishable 

 from swinhoei range west across southern Shansi and Shensi, while 

 suhluteus occurs over the northern parts of these provinces. HoUister 

 assumed one of the dark-chested examples of the former to be suh- 

 luteus during comparisons of the specimen which he described under 

 the name soioerhyae. The type of the latter and a topotype, however, 

 are indistinguishable from typical suhluteus and the name must be 

 placed in the synonym}^ of the latter. Sowerby found this hare to be 

 common in mountainous and hilly country as well as on the plains. 



LEPUS TOLAI SWINHOEI Thomas 



Lepus swinhoei Thomas, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 6. vol. 13. 1894, p. 384 

 (Chef 00, Shantung, China). 



Specimens. — Four: Tientsin, 1, and 65 miles northeast of Peking, 

 Chihli, 2 ; and 80 miles west-southwest of Sianf u, Shensi, 1. 



One of the specirnens from northeast of Peking is a juvenile and 

 considerably darker than the others. On the basis of the present 

 material I can not recognize flchneri as a valid race. 



LEPUS TOLAI AURIGINEUS Hollister 



Lcpus aurigincus Hollister, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., vol. 25, 1912, p. 181 

 (probably Kiukiang, Kiangsi, China). 



Specimens. — Six : Kiukiang, Kiangsi, 1 (the type); Shanghai, 

 Kiangsu, 1; and Suifu, Szechwan, 4. 



This race was based upon a subadult, imperfect skin having so 

 much of the tail missing that the color of this member can not be 

 told. The label bears merely the word China, but the museum cata- 

 logue gives the information that the locality was Chiu Keang, which 

 may or may not be Kiukiang, Kiangsi, and the date of capture 

 December 27, 1880. There is also in the national collection a com- 

 panion skin of the identical poor make and with a similar label, being 

 indistinguighable from the type save that the entire tail is present. 

 The position of this specimen in the accession catalogue is upon the 

 line preceding the one occupied b}^ the type of aurigineus. Tlte 

 locality is given as Shanghai (as it is upon the label), and the date, 

 of capture (not of accession) also December 27, 1880. Whether or 

 not these two specimens were actually killed upon the sam^ clay in 

 the province of Kiangsi or of Kiangsu, they are most certainly of 



