Consider the following statements related to Wellesley’s administratio

Consider the following statements related to Wellesley’s administration:

  • 1. In the six years of Wellesley’s administration, the army accounted for 42.5 percent of the Company’s total expenditure.
  • 2. Wellesley’s administrative measures were restricted to the affairs of the Company and had nothing to do with the commercial and military affairs of the Indian ruling families.

Which of the statement/s given above is/are correct ?

1 only
2 only
Both 1 and 2
Neither 1 nor 2
This question was previously asked in
UPSC NDA-2 – 2019
Statement 1 is likely correct. Lord Wellesley’s period (1798-1805) was marked by aggressive expansion through the Subsidiary Alliance system and direct military action, leading to frequent wars (like the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War and the Second Anglo-Maratha War). This period saw a massive increase in the East India Company’s military expenditure and debt. Historical accounts confirm that military costs constituted a very significant portion of the Company’s total expenditure during this time. Statement 2 is incorrect. Wellesley’s policies, especially the Subsidiary Alliance, directly involved and profoundly impacted the commercial, military, and political affairs of Indian ruling families, bringing them under British control and undermining their sovereignty. His administration was far from being restricted only to Company affairs; it aimed at establishing British paramountcy in India.
Wellesley’s administration was characterized by imperial expansionism through the Subsidiary Alliance and wars, leading to increased British dominance and substantial military expenditure.
The Subsidiary Alliance system required Indian rulers to disband their own armies, accept a British force stationed in their territory (paid for by the ruler), and accept a British Resident at their court. This effectively brought the Indian states under British control and prevented them from forming alliances with each other or other foreign powers. This policy significantly increased the military burden on the Company and the states but secured British political and military supremacy.
Exit mobile version