The ostensible causes of this revolution are honestly, indeed, but not very satisfactorily, stated by the Governor himself in his narrative[212], and seem to have been chiefly the financial difficulties of the Company's affairs. The Nabob was to a certain extent in arrear, and other pressures were felt. "The season had now begun," says Mr. Vansittart, "when our forces were to take the field against a powerful enemy, whilst we had scarce a rupee in our treasury to enable us to put them in motion. The easy channel in which the Company's affairs ran, whilst the sums stipulated by the treaty (with Meer Jaffier) lasted, had diverted their attention from the distresses which must unavoidably fall on them, whenever that fund should be exhausted; and continuing to act on the same extensive plan in which they set out, they now found themselves surrounded by numerous difficulties, which were heightened by the particular circumstances of the country at this period, and weighed down with the very advantages which they had acquired; that is, an establishment which had lost the foundation on which it was built; a military force proportioned to their connections and influence in the country without the means of subsistence; a fortification begun upon the same extensive plan, at a vast expense; and an alliance with a power unable to support itself, and threatening to involve them in the same ruin." Mr. Vansittart adds, that had indolence and weakness been the Nabob's only faults, destructive as they were to the welfare of the country and of the Company, he would have felt more severely the necessity of measures the tendency of which was to dissolve the engagements between him and the Company; but that in addition to this, he found a general disaffection to his government and detestation of his person and principles in all ranks of people. Even from this representation of the person principally concerned in the revolution, it is plain that the measure "of not only breaking a solemn treaty without previous warning and negotiation with the prince with whom it was contracted, but even of dethroning that prince, without attempting to remedy by some convention the temporary evils complained of, was a rash and unjustifiable measure, particularly where the change and all the articles of the new treaty were so obviously for the advantage of one of the parties only."