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

as his opinions regarding Ward's failure of policy-making in the Islands. 170 Towards
the end of his tenure Grey, openly frustrated with Ward and his actions, appears to
have given up on him and the possibility of moving forward with reforms.
Conclusion
From the start of his tenure, Ward was critical of Seaton’s reforms. His
criticisms only hardened after the Cephalonian uprisings, the causes of which he
manipulated to further his own political agenda to resurrect authoritarian rule to the
Islands. His hardening authoritarian attitude was illustrated in his relationship with
the Ionian Assembly, where they repeatedly sparred as each attempted to define the
extent of his/their power. Ward repeatedly depicted the Ionians as violent, disloyal,
disorderly, even savage and barbaric, language normally preserved for depictions of
Africans and Pacific Islanders and echoed to the British public in the Times. He
continually tried to build the case they were unfit for representative government.
The experiment in the Islands and his difficulties with the Assembly led Ward
to conclude the races were different and, within Europe, not all were equal. Ward
believed only British dependencies peopled by Britons were worthy of political
independence. Only Anglo-Saxons, the most culturally and ethnically superior, had
the right to liberty. All other dependencies, from black Africans in the Caribbean and
brown Indians to white Europeans such as the Irish and, as argued, the Ionians, were
170 Hawes to Ward, Private, 21 May 1852, Grey Papers, GRE/B130/6/61. Hawes believed Ward was
too critical of Grey and needed to take more responsibility for his own failings in the Islands rather
than blame Grey for them all.
263