connection, it invokes the jurisprudence of this Court and the Permanent Court concerning the interpretation of unilateral declarations of acceptance of the Court's jurisdiction (Anglo-Iranian Oil Co., I. C.J. Reports 1951, p. 104; Rights of Minorities in Upper Silesia, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 15, p. 22; Phosphates in Morocco, P.C.I.J., Series A/B, No. 74, pp. 2224). According to this jurisprudence it is indeed clear that in interpreting reservation (b) regard must be paid to the intention of the Greek Government at the time when it deposited its instrument of accession to the General Act; and it was with that jurisprudence in rnind that the Court asked the Greek Government to furnish it with any available evidence of explanations of the instrument of accession given at that time. 70. The Court has already referred to M. Politis's letter to the Greek Foreign Minister of 9 September 1928setting out the reservationswhich he recommended Greece should make to its declaration under the optional clause of Article 36 of the Statute. One of his recommendations concerned "disputes relating to the territorial status of Greece" and another "disputes relating to its rights of sovereignty over its ports and lines of communication". The Greek Government is therefore justified in asking the Court to conclude that it was the same motive which inspired their inclusion also in reservation (b) of Greece's accession to the General Act. It goes further, however, and asks the Court to interpret reservation (b) in the light of that motive, so as to restrict its scope to matters of territorial status connected with attempts to revise the territorial arrangements established by the peace treaties of the First World War. Moreover, in support of this interpretation of reservation (b), the Greek Government has also laid stress on the general historical context in which reservations of questions relating to territorial status had come into use in the League of Nations period. 71. Disputes concerning territorial status were expressly mentioned in Article 39, paragraph 2, of the General Act as an example of the "clearly specified subject-matters" in regard to which reservations to the Act were to be perrnitted. Consequently, it is reasonable to presume that there is a close link between the concepts of territorial status in the General Act and in Greece's instrument of accession to it; and that presumption is al1 the stronger when it is recalled that M. Politis was the Rapporteur for the drafting of the General Act as well as the author of the letter of 9 September 1928 whch prompted Greece's recourse to a reservation under the optional clause relating to territorial status. Thus, the meaning with which the expression "territorial status" was used in Article 39 of the General Act may clearly have a bearing on its meaning in Greece's instrument of accession. 72. Counsel for Greece went into the historical evidence in detail more especially the use of the expression in the numerous bilateral treaties of