C 7 ] 
I find accordingly, that Linnaeus hath omitted the 
pupillh rubris , as applied to the Rabbit, in the 
twelfth edition of Lis Syftema Naturae; but adds 
another diftindtion, which will be found equally to 
fail. 
He there fays, that the ears of a Rabbit are 
fhorter than the head ; whereas thofe of a Hare are 
longer: which is a juft obfervation, when the war- 
ren Rabbit is examined ; but the tame Rabbit (and 
particularly thofe which are white or carroty) have 
ears that are confiderably longer than their head. 
This circumftance, therefore, eftablifhes no more a 
fpecific difference between the Rabbit and the Hare, 
than the greater length of the ears of a dog would, 
which in fome varieties of that animal are known to 
be exceffively long. 
Monf. de Buffon, in his defcription of the Hare 
and Rabbit, agrees with Ray that there is nothing 
either exterior or interior which feems to conftitute 
a fpecific difference, though he endeavours to efta- 
blifh an inconteftable proof that they are really dif- 
tindt. 
He informs us, that he had tried to procure a 
breed between Rabbits and Hares, but never could 
fucceed in the experiment. 
This moft ingenious and able writer does not hate, 
however, at what ages the Hares or Rabbits were 
thus confined, which is known to be a moft material 
with black : the grey Rabbit however never hath eyes of a red 
colour. "When the white Rabbits are very young, their eyes 
are often like a ferret’s ; but when they are grown to their full 
fize, the pupils are generally quite red. 
$ circumftance, 
