Working through the issue of identifying the 42 urban / rural pairs in Eastern China stations  shown on the FIG 1c map in Jones et all 1990 Letter to Nature
The Jones et al 1990 approach in Eastern China  is very different when compared to their Western USSR section, where they compiled a 38 station rural series to measure against their Jones et al 1986 gridded data.  In Eastern China they set up 42 urban / rural station pairs with data only for 30 years,  and then  compare these trends to their gridded data and to one another. 30 years is a short enough period that data inhomogeneities can play a large part in affecting trend comparisons.
Starting with the FIG 1c map labelled MAP CA, I have numbered the urban / rural station pairs 1 to 42 in black and they are so listed  on my echina42.xls worksheet  where I am recording progress towards identifying all of the 84  stations. Two datasets of Chinese met records were produced in the 1980's and later updated, these are available online at CDIAC as a 65 station set and a 205 station set, termed NDP039.
These 270 China stations  were available at the time Jones et al 1990 was written so seem a logical place to begin identifying the 84 stations in the 42 urban / rural pairs.
Map CA2  has been registered for latitude and longitude and has the 65 station locations added  as red circles plotted by mapping software.  It is crystal clear that only two sites correspond with stations in the 65 station datset, these are 22 and 26 of my numbers. As per the above spreadsheet. 
Map CA3  is  the same base map but with station locations from the 205 station series. Now we hit paydirt and see 36 stations with locations that are a "bullsye" fit over one of the 42 original station points in FIG 1c.  Another 3 stations are very close and these are referred to as "edge" fits on the spreadsheet.  We are left with only 1 station pair,  # 14 with no match in either 65 or 205 station dataset.  For interest this map also has the stations from Jones et al 1986 global compilation plotted as red  triangles.
At this point studying Map CA2 and 3 it is obvious that although we have discovered one matching station for 41 of the Jones et al 42 points,  we have no idea  yet of the identities of the other 42 paired stations.
We have the large global station list from the NOAA website to check, which totals ~23,000 sites global and we find 1184 for China.  Superimposing these locations  on the lat long registered FIG 1c map we make Map CA4 and we see by visual inspection that there may be some candidates for a nearby "pair" to some of our known 41 stations.  It will take a lot of  time consuming analysis and experimentation to make progress but how much simpler it would be if  Jones et al 1990 had provided a list of station locations when asked.
It is worth remembering here  that a comparison of  HadCRUT2 vs UAHuntsville lower troposphere satellite temperature trends, for a block of Eastern China grid cells, 20 to 40 North and  110 to 120 East, shows the surface to be warming at a colossal 0.96 degrees C more than the satellites over  the 27 years 1979-2005.  This difference equates to about 3.5 degrees  per century, yet the IPCC clings to these gridded data without a blush.

Back to the Jones et al 1990 Letter to Nature page.