Conflict With British
Upon ascending the throne, Mir Qasim repaid the British with lavish gifts. To please the British, Mir Qasim robbed everybody, confiscated lands, reduced Mir Jafar's purse and depleted the treasury. He also transferred the districts of Burdwan, Midnapur and Chittagong to the British East India Company. However, he soon tired of British interference and endless avarice and like Mir Jafar before him, yearned to break free of the British. He shifted his capital from Murshidabad to Munger in present day Bihar where he raised an independent army, financing them by streamlining tax collection.
He opposed the British East India Company's position that their imperial Mughal licence (dastak) meant that they could trade without paying taxes (other local merchants with dastaks were required to pay up to 40% of their revenue as tax). Frustrated at the British refusal to pay these taxes, Mir Qasim abolished taxes on the local traders as well. This upset the advantage that the British traders had been enjoying so far, and hostilities built up. After losing a number of skirmishes, Mir Qasim overran the Company offices in Patna in 1763, killing several Europeans including the Resident. Mir Qasim allied with Shuja-ud-Daula of Avadh and Shah Alam II, the itinerant Mughal emperor, who were also threatened by the British. However, their combined forces were defeated in the Battle of Buxar in 1764, ceding control of the rich Ganges plain to the British.
The short campaign of Mir Qasim was significant as a direct fight against British outsiders by native Bengali. Unlike Siraj-ud-Daulah before him, Mir Qasim was an effective and popular ruler. Their success at Buxar established the British as conquerors of Bengal in a much more real sense than the Battle of Plassey seven years earlier.
Mir Qasim was defeated by during the Battle of Murshidabad, Battle of Gherain and the Battle of Oondwa Nullah.
Read more about this topic: Mir Qasim
Famous quotes containing the words conflict with, conflict and/or british:
“We are not naïve enough to ask for pure men; we ask merely for men whose impurity does not conflict with the obligations of their job.”
—Jean Rostand (1894–1977)
“Two principles, according to the Settembrinian cosmogony, were in perpetual conflict for possession of the world: force and justice, tyranny and freedom, superstition and knowledge; the law of permanence and the law of change, of ceaseless fermentation issuing in progress. One might call the first the Asiatic, the second the European principle.”
—Thomas Mann (1875–1955)
“A certain secret jealousy of the British Minister is always lurking in the breast of every American Senator, if he is truly democratic; for democracy, rightly understood, is the government of the people, by the people, for the benefit of Senators, and there is always a danger that the British Minister may not understand this political principle as he should.”
—Henry Brooks Adams (1838–1918)