Constructing Ionian identities: the Ionian Islands in British official ...

Ionian individuals. Goulburn interpreted the radicals’ criticism as both an attack on
Maitland’s character and on the government. The charges against Maitland were
completely “groundless”, he insisted. The British government had chosen the best
person to govern the European territories and entertained complete faith and trust in
Maitland’s administration of the Islands.
Sir Robert Wilson, a radical Whig who supported parliamentary reform and
opposed the government’s repressive legislation at home, defended Maitland,
dismissing the notion the Ionian government was an “arbitrary” one. 18 Similarly John
Peter Grant, a Whig politician and judge who opposed repressive legislation in
Britain, did not believe the accusations of Maitland’s “misconduct” towards the
Ionian people. He believed Maitland had acted according to the principles of the
Ionian Constitution. Grant did not accept the Constitution’s despotic nature, noting it
had been ratified by the Ionian Assembly. 19 The support for Maitland by these two
radical Whigs indicates the divisive and contradictory nature of the Ionian issue.
Wilson, Grant and other radical MPs might support liberal policies at home but they
could support despotic and conservative rule within the Empire.
The Foreign Secretary, Castlereagh, reminded MPs the Ionian Islands were not
officially a colony. As a protectorate, Britain had undertaken a “superintending care
over them, which ought not be withdrawn”. He made two points, one which
dismissed the idea of adopting a British constitution in the Islands, arguing it “would
18 Ibid., p. 1147.
19 Ibid., p. 1146.
117