Which of the following statements is/are not correct regarding the Sub...
Subsidiary Alliance
- In 1798, it was introduced by Wellesley in India, the ruler of the allying Indian state was compelled to pay a subsidy for the maintenance of the British army in return for getting protection from the British against their enemies. Hence, statement 1 is correct.
- Those native princes or rulers who would enter into the Subsidiary Alliance were not free to declare war against any other power or enter into negotiations without the consent of the British.
- The Subsidiary Alliance was a policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of the allied state, but this was a promise seldom kept by the British. Hence, statement 2 is correct.
- The payment of the arbitrarily-fixed and artificially-bloated subsidy invariably disrupted the economy of the state and impoverished its people.
- On the other hand, the British could now maintain a large army at the cost of the Indian states.
- They controlled the defense and foreign relations of the protected ally, and had a powerful force stationed at the very heart of his lands.
- Lord Wellesley signed his first Subsidiary Treaty with the Nizam of Hyderabad in 1798. Hence, statement 3 is not correct.
- The Nawab of Avadh was forced to sign a Subsidiary Treaty in 1801.
- Peshwa Baji Rao II (Maratha) signed the Subsidiary Treaty at Bassein in 1802.
Which of the following statements is/are not correct regarding the Sub...
Explanation:
The Subsidiary Alliance was a policy introduced by Lord Wellesley, the Governor-General of India from 1798 to 1805. The policy aimed to create a network of dependent states under the British East India Company's control. The correct statements regarding the Subsidiary Alliance are as follows:
Statement 1: It was introduced by Lord Wellesley in India.
This statement is correct. Lord Wellesley introduced the Subsidiary Alliance policy during his tenure as the Governor-General of India.
Statement 2: It was a policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of the allied state.
This statement is incorrect. The Subsidiary Alliance was actually a policy of direct interference in the internal affairs of the allied state. Under this policy, the British East India Company would provide military protection to the allied state in exchange for control over its foreign relations and the stationing of British troops within its territory. The allied state was also required to pay a subsidy to the British for the maintenance of these troops. In essence, the Subsidiary Alliance allowed the British to exert significant influence and control over the affairs of the allied state.
Statement 3: The first Subsidiary Treaty was signed by the Nawab of Awadh in 1801.
This statement is correct. The first Subsidiary Treaty was indeed signed by the Nawab of Awadh (Oudh) in 1801. This marked the beginning of the implementation of the Subsidiary Alliance policy.
Therefore, the correct answer is option C: 3 only. The Subsidiary Alliance was not a policy of non-interference but rather a policy of direct interference in the internal affairs of the allied state.