CDS (I) 2022 GK Q99: Which one of the following was not included in the terms

Q: What is the answer to CDS (I) 2022 GK Q99?

B. Correct — B, the ally was free to enter into agreements with other rulers or engage in warfare. This is the one condition the Subsidiary Alliance never contained; it states the opposite of what the system did. The whole point of Wellesley's arrangement was that a signatory surrendered its foreign policy. The ruler had to accept the Company as the supreme power in external affairs, could not make war or negotiate with any other State without British consent, could not employ any European in his service without British approval, and had to receive a British Resident at court who supervised his correspondence. What he received in exchange was protection against attack and against internal rebellion, and what he paid was a subsidy in cash or, more often, a slice of territory to maintain the British contingent quartered in his dominions. The other three options are the three genuine limbs of the bargain, which is why the free-hand clause is the intruder.

CDS (I) 2022 General Knowledge · Question 99 of 120

Question text verified against the official CDS question paper.

Which one of the following was not included in the terms and conditions of Subsidiary Alliance System of Lord Wellesley?

(a)The British would protect their ally.
(b)The ally was free to enter into agreements with other rulers or engage in warfare.
(c)In the territory of the ally, a British armed contingent would be stationed.
(d)The ally would have to provide resources for the maintenance of the British armed contingent.

Answer

Why

Correct — B, the ally was free to enter into agreements with other rulers or engage in warfare. This is the one condition the Subsidiary Alliance never contained; it states the opposite of what the system did. The whole point of Wellesley's arrangement was that a signatory surrendered its foreign policy. The ruler had to accept the Company as the supreme power in external affairs, could not make war or negotiate with any other State without British consent, could not employ any European in his service without British approval, and had to receive a British Resident at court who supervised his correspondence. What he received in exchange was protection against attack and against internal rebellion, and what he paid was a subsidy in cash or, more often, a slice of territory to maintain the British contingent quartered in his dominions. The other three options are the three genuine limbs of the bargain, which is why the free-hand clause is the intruder.

Why the others are wrong

(a)The British would protect their ally. — This was the promise on the British side and the inducement that made rulers sign — protection against external attack, and in practice against internal challengers too. It is a real term of the alliance.
(c)In the territory of the ally, a British armed contingent would be stationed. — Stationing a British force at or near the ally's capital is the defining feature of the system and the reason it is called subsidiary. The contingent was the guarantee of protection and the instrument of control at the same time.
(d)The ally would have to provide resources for the maintenance of the British armed contingent. — Paying for that contingent was the other half of the deal. Rulers who could not or would not pay in cash ceded territory instead, which is how the Company acquired the Ceded Districts from Hyderabad in 1800 and the whole of Awadh's northern belt in 1801.

Concept

The Subsidiary Alliance was perfected by Lord Wellesley, Governor-General from 1798 to 1805, though the idea of hiring out Company troops for a subsidy was older. A ruler who signed accepted a permanent British force in his territory, paid for it in money or land, gave up the right to conduct his own diplomacy or make war, took a British Resident at his court, and dismissed non-British Europeans from his service. In return the Company undertook to defend him and not to interfere in his internal administration — an undertaking that grew steadily thinner. The Nizam of Hyderabad signed the first well-defined alliance in 1798; Tanjore followed in 1799, Awadh in 1801, the Peshwa in 1802 by the Treaty of Bassein, the Bhonsle in 1803 and the Scindia in 1804.

Every option here except one is a clause a candidate can find in any account of the system, so the item is really testing whether you can spot a clause that has been inverted. The word to watch is 'free' — nothing in the Subsidiary Alliance left an Indian ruler free in his external dealings, since removing that freedom was the object of the exercise. It is also worth seeing the trap in the second half of option (b): a ruler who could still 'engage in warfare' at will would have had no need of a subsidiary force. The system's deeper effect was fiscal. States that ceded revenue-rich districts to pay for troops were left with shrunken treasuries and a disbanded army, and when they fell into arrears the Company annexed more — which is how Awadh, a subsidiary ally since 1801, was finally swallowed in 1856.

Key facts

Under the Subsidiary Alliance a ruler had to accept the British as the supreme power in external affairs and could not negotiate with or make war on another State without British permission.
A British armed contingent was stationed in the ally's territory and the ally paid for its maintenance in cash or by ceding territory.
A British Resident was posted at the ally's court and supervised his diplomatic correspondence.
The Nizam of Hyderabad concluded the first well-defined subsidiary alliance in 1798; Awadh followed in 1801 and the Peshwa in 1802.
The ally was forbidden to keep an independent standing army or to employ Europeans without British approval.

Study next

The Treaty of Bassein, 1802, and the Second Anglo-Maratha WarThe Doctrine of Lapse under Dalhousie and how it differed from the Subsidiary AllianceThe annexation of Awadh in 1856 and the road from subsidiary ally to annexed provinceThe office of the Resident and how it worked inside a princely courtRing-fence, subsidiary alliance and paramountcy as three stages of Company policy

Common traps

Reading option (b) quickly and taking 'the ally was free' as a description of what he retained. He gave that freedom up.
Attributing the system to Dalhousie. Dalhousie's instrument was the Doctrine of Lapse; the Subsidiary Alliance was Wellesley's.
Assuming the Company promised not to interfere internally and kept that promise. Non-interference was written in and steadily ignored.

As a not-a-feature item on the terms of the alliance, as a who-devised-it question, or as a chronology of which State signed when.

Related PYQs

UPSC_2018_GS1_Q752018Open & attempt →

Which one of the following statements does not apply to the system of Subsidiary Alliance introduced by Lord Wellesley?

(a) To maintain a large standing army at other's expense
(b) To keep India safe from Napoleonic danger
(c) To secure a fixed income for the Company
(d) To establish British paramountcy over the Indian States

Answer(c) To secure a fixed income for the Company

The same not-a-feature pattern applied to the aims rather than the clauses. The alliance kept a large army at Indian expense, answered the French threat and built paramountcy; a guaranteed revenue stream was never its design, however much territory it eventually brought in.

NDA_GAT_2017_I_Q1142017Open & attempt →

Which one of the following was NOT a feature of the Subsidiary Alliance of Lord Wellesley ?

(a) The British were responsible for protecting the ally from any external threats
(b) All internal threats were to be handled by the ally alone, with no help from the British
(c) The ally was to provide resources for maintaining a British armed contingent stationed in its territory
(d) The ally could not enter into any agreement with other rulers without the permission of the British

Answer(b) All internal threats were to be handled by the ally alone, with no help from the British

Practically the same question, five years earlier and built from the same four clauses. Here the inverted clause is the internal-security one instead of the diplomatic one, and the restriction on dealing with other rulers is printed as a true feature — the exact statement the CDS paper turns upside down.

Practice

practice — not a real PYQ
Which one of the following Indian States was the first to conclude a well-defined Subsidiary Alliance with the English East India Company?
- (a)Awadh
- (b)Hyderabad
- (c)Mysore
- (d)Gwalior
Answer(b) Hyderabad — the Nizam signed in 1798, ahead of Tanjore in 1799, Awadh in 1801 and the Peshwa in 1802.
practice — not a real PYQ
Under the Subsidiary Alliance system, an Indian ruler who could not pay for the British contingent in cash was generally required to
- (a)supply soldiers to the Company army instead
- (b)cede a part of his territory to the Company
- (c)hand over his revenue records to the Resident
- (d)accept a British officer as his chief minister
Answer(b) cede a part of his territory — Hyderabad gave up the Ceded Districts in 1800 and Awadh a large northern belt in 1801 on exactly this basis.