evidence: In an article written for an earlier issue of this journal (see note 2 above), the author pointed out that the general rule of treaty interpretation provides that "A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in light of its object and purpose," and argued that the term Chishima Islands (Kurile Islands) in the Peace Treaty can be interpreted as the islands north of Uruppu that were the subject of exchange under the 1875 treaty, for the context here is that the Treaty of Commerce, Navigation and Delimitation between Japan and Russia of 1855 confirmed the previously existing border between Japan and Russia in the Chishima area, in other words, the four Northern Islands have been Japanese territory from the beginning, and what’s more, the Allied Powers themselves had proclaimed the principle of non-territorial aggrandizement. By looking at the preparatory work to the Peace Treaty as a supplementary means of interpretation, we can confirm that there is no reason to reconsider this conclusion.