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

centuries under Venetian and Russian-Turkish occupation and, in his eyes, had
proved their fitness for government. 39
To Monck, the Treaty of Paris made a mockery of British promises about
Ionian independence. “They were told that they enjoyed an independence; but it was
the will of a power that was appointed their protector. Their legislature was declared
free; but there was a British commissioner, who was empowered to regulate its
proceedings;” this was a state in which “no legislature, even of a West Indian island
was placed” he argued. There the assemblies had more freedom, ruling with the
cooperation of the British governors, than the Ionians had been granted. 40 He urged
the House not to diminish the importance of granting political independence to the
Ionians, following the official British promises.
Monck failed to convince the Irish judge, John Leslie Foster. Foster was a
protégé of both Peel and Liverpool and through them he enjoyed government
support in important Irish appointments. He argued Britain acted with the best of
intentions in the Septinsula. “What we understand by national independence was not
really desirable for them” he stated. For four centuries the Islands had been under a
succession of foreign rulers. Something [national independence] unknown to them
could not be appreciated by them. The “inhabitants being people of heated
imaginations and lively tempers...” had also demonstrated a greed for power that had
resulted in civil war. 41 The inhabitants of Zante had invited Britain to take possession
39 Ibid., p. 638.
40 Ibid.
41 Ibid., p. 639.
87