Which one of the following statements is not true about Subsidiary Alliance ?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct option is 3:
The Subsidiary Alliance System, introduced by Lord Wellesley in India, was a major tool for the expansion of British power. A core provision of this alliance required the native ruler to accept a permanent British force for the protection of their state. Critically, as part of this arrangement, the native ruler was **compelled to allow a British Resident** to permanently reside in their capital. This Resident acted as a watchdog, closely monitoring the ruler's actions and interfering in the state's internal and external affairs. Therefore, the statement that "The Native Rulers did not allow English Residents to reside in their territory" is factually incorrect and is the statement that is not true about the Subsidiary Alliance.

The incorrect option is 1:
Subsidiary Alliance was an important ploy for the expansion of British Empire. This statement is true. The system allowed the British to maintain large armies at the expense of native states, control their foreign policy, and gradually strip away their sovereignty without formally annexing them immediately.

The incorrect option is 2:
Subsidiary Alliance was concluded between the English and the Native Rulers. This statement is true. The alliance was a contractual agreement, often forced upon Indian rulers, that formalized the relationship between the British East India Company and the native state, placing the latter under British 'protection'.

The incorrect option is 4:
The Native Rulers accepted to bear expenses of the English Army stationed in their kingdom. This statement is true. One of the principal and most burdensome conditions of the alliance was that the native ruler had to pay for the maintenance of the British subsidiary forces, often ceding territory if they failed to make cash payments.