ABSTRACT The ultimate test of whether an association is voluntary or not is if you can leave it. It is difficult, at this remove, to appreciate how live an issue secession from the British commonwealth of nations was in the 1920s and 1930s. It occupied an inordinate amount of time and negotiation for a doctrine that had been ostensibly conceded in 1920. Yet, much as with the case of the appeal to the judicial committee of the privy council, once the dominions sought to take advantage of the freedom which had been guaranteed by official statements, they found a formidable amount of diplomatic pressure and legal opinion brought to bear to indicate that no such right could be officially declared. This article traces the evolution of the arguments about the right to secede in the 1930s, and examines how the right came eventually to be exercised in the case of the new commonwealth countries in the 1940s. It concludes by examining how the doctrine of secession as developed in the 1930s was abandoned in order to retain Indian membership in the commonwealth.

中文翻译：

---

“射杀自己的权利”：英联邦的分裂国家

摘要 一个协会是否自愿的最终测试是你是否可以离开它。在这个距离上，很难理解在 1920 年代和 1930 年代脱离英联邦的问题是多么的活跃。1920 年表面上被承认的一项学说占用了过多的时间和谈判。然而，就像向枢密院司法委员会上诉的情况一样，一旦自治领试图利用自由得到了官方声明的保证，但他们发现有大量外交压力和法律意见被付诸实施，表明不能正式宣布此类权利。这篇文章追溯了 1930 年代关于分离权的争论的演变，并研究了 1940 年代新英联邦国家如何最终行使这项权利。最后，它考察了 1930 年代发展起来的分离学说是如何被放弃以保留印度在英联邦中的成员资格的。