Skip to main content

Extension of British Paramountcy



British Paramountcy followed two-fold approach for Expansion and Consolidation of British power in India 
  1. Policy of annexation by conquest or war
  2. Policy of annexation by diplomacy and administrative mechanism
Under "Policy of annexation by diplomacy and administrative mechanism" head we would discuss three policies-
  • Ring-fence Policy – Warren Hastings
  • Subsidiary Alliance – Wellesley
  • Doctrine of Lapse – Dalhousie

The Policy of Ring-Fence: 

  • Aimed at creating buffer zones to defend the Company’s frontiers, it was the policy of defence of their neighbors’ frontiers for safeguarding their own territories.
  • This policy of Warren Hastings was reflected in his war against the Marathas and Mysore.
  • To safeguard Company’s territories was from the Afghan invaders and the Marathas, the Company undertook to organise the defence of the frontiers of Awadh on the condition that that the Nawab would defray the expenses of the defending army.
  • The states brought under the ring-fence system were assured of military assistance against external aggression—but at their own expense.

Subsidiary Alliance: 

  • Wellesley’s policy of subsidiary alliance was, in fact, an extension of the ring-fence system.
  • Under the system, the allying Indian state’s ruler was compelled to accept the permanent stationing of a British force within his territory and to pay a subsidy for its maintenance. Also, the Indian ruler had to agree to the posting of a British resident in his court.
  • Indian ruler could not employ any European in his service without the prior approval of the British. Nor could he negotiate with any other Indian ruler without consulting the governor-general.
  • Original Idea of Subsidiary Alliance was of Lord Dupleix (French General).
  • First state to fall into this trap: Hyderabad
States which accepted alliance: Hyderabad, Mysore, Tanjore, Awadh, Peshwa, Scindia.

Doctrine of Lapse: 

  • Original idea of Raja Ranjit Singh.
  • The adopted son could be the heir to his foster father’s private property, but not to the state. It is the power of British to decide either to bestow the state on the adopted son or to annex it.
  • Though this policy is attributed to Lord Dalhousie (1848-56), he was not its originator.
  • Annexed Lapsed States: Satara, Sambhalpur, Baghat, Udaipur, Nagpur, Jhansi, Awadh.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How To Stay Motivated !

Imagine you are playing tennis. If you try to play a serious match against a four-year-old, you will quickly become bored. The match is too easy. On the opposite end of the spectrum, if you try to play a serious match against a professional tennis player like Roger Federer or Serena Williams, you will find yourself demotivated for a different reason. The match is too difficult. Compare these experiences to playing tennis against someone who is your equal. As the game progresses, you win a few points and you lose a few points. You have a chance of winning the match, but only if you really try. Your focus narrows, distractions fade away, and you find yourself fully invested in the task at hand. The challenge you are facing is “just manageable.” Victory is not guaranteed, but it is possible. Tasks like these, science has found, are the most likely to keep us motivated in the long term. Human beings love challenges, but only if they are within the optimal zone of difficulty. Task...
Post a Comment
Read more

Public Funding Of Elections

What is state or public funding of elections? This means that government gives funds to political parties or candidates for contesting elections. Its main purpose is to make it unnecessary for contestants to take money from powerful moneyed interests so that they can remain clean. Why public funding is good?  Political parties and candidates need money for their electoral campaigns, to keep contacts with their constituencies, to prepare policy decisions and to pay professional staff. Therefore, public funding is a natural and necessary cost of democracy.  Public funding can limit the influence of interested money and thereby help curb corruption.  Public funding can increase transparency in party and candidate finance and thereby help curb corruption.  In societies where many citizens are under or just above the poverty line, they cannot be expected to donate large amounts of money to political parties or candidates. If parties and candidates recei...
Post a Comment
Read more