should rely for external defence and internal security mainly upon the paramount military strength of the British sovereignty.
The system of subsidiary treaties is worth some brief explanation, for it has played a very important part in the expansion of British dominion. It has been seen that English participation in Indian wars began when we lent the aid of a military contingent to assist some native potentate. The next stage came when we took the field on our own account, usually assisted by the levies of some prince who made common cause with us, and whose soldiery were undisciplined, untrustworthy, and very clumsily handled. The English commander often found it necessary to look behind as well as before him on the field of battle; his allies showed unseasonable impartiality by holding aloof at critical moments and reappearing to plunder in both camps indiscriminately, giving preference to the defeated side. What was needed was a body of men that could be relied upon for some kind of tactical precision and steadiness under fire; but for this purpose it was of little use even to place sepoys under European officers unless they could be regularly paid and taught to obey one master.
The system, therefore, soon reached the stage where the native ally was required to supply not men but money, and the English undertook to raise, train, and pay a fixed number of troops on receiving a subsidy equivalent to their cost. The subsidiary treaties made in India differed, accordingly, from those made by Eng-
