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

the Senate took the recess of Parliament to enact an Atto di Governo requiring the
annual publication and revision of lists of not only electors, but those entitled to
become candidates. Although rejected by the Assembly in December 1850, the
Senate eventually utilised the force of law to pass it. 129 Ward hoped Grey would
support him, but was disappointed in Grey's refusal to offer official support
regarding all his actions. 130
Russell and Grey viewed Ward's actions with uneasiness. Although Russell
would normally trust Ward's decisions, “supported as he is by his Senate”, he was
concerned that Ward's actions were heavy-handed and questioned their “legality”. 131
Yet Russell was uncertain about what course of action should be taken and examined
the consequences of attempting to maintain the current law, of attempting to adopt a
new law or returning to the old law. Russell's main concern, however, was that Ward
was suppressing the new constitutional powers of the Assembly. He believed the
Atto di Governo was “a course clearly unconstitutional” and suppression of the
Assembly amounted to a “coup d'etat”. 132
Ward, however, expressed satisfaction over his handling of the issue to his
superiors in London. 133 He had predicted the unfitness of the Ionian character to self-
government soon after he arrived on the Islands, but now he knew he had been right,
129 Ward to Grey, 20 May 1850, CO 136/136
130 Ward to Hawes, Private, 6 January 1851, Grey Papers, GRE/B130/6/21. Ward's frustration with
Grey on multiple issues would be exhibited in much of his correspondence with Hawes.
131 Russell to Grey, 19 December 1850, Grey Papers, GRE/B122/6/56.
132 Ibid.
133 Ward to Grey 20 April 1850, CO 136/135 For the exchange between the Senate and the Assembly
see the numerous enclosures in Ward to Grey, Confidential, 7 May 1850, CO 136/136; Ward to Grey,
6 September 1850, CO 136/137; Ward to Grey, 16 May 1851, CO 136/140.
253