2. It now remains to consider the measures to be taken for the future. Government have done all that lay within their power to enable the Moharram processions to be held with due regard to the safety of the law-abiding mass of the community, but without success. In 1909 and 1910 there were no processions; but this year, as in 1908, in spite of every precaution there were scenes of disorder and violence which had ultimately to be quelled by military force with considerable loss of life. Government cannot allow the recurrence of such disturbances, and it has become necessary to consider whether the procession of tabuts, with their attendant _tolis_, should not be prohibited next year. Before arriving at any final decision, however, Government trust that the Mahomedan community will, through their leaders or otherwise, endeavour to concert effective measures to secure that, while the religious character of the observance of the Moharram is retained, there may be a reasonable guarantee that it shall not again degenerate into lawlessness, discreditable to all concerned and gravely injurious to the interests of Bombay. The Governor-in-Council will be ready to give the most careful consideration to any such proposals, but it will be possible to adopt them only if they seem to provide a reasonable guarantee against any future disturbance of the peace. 3. In this connection the leaders of the Mahomedan community could do much to assist the cause of law and order by explaining to the people that the tabut processions and _tolis_ are in no way necessary to the religious celebration of the Moharram. Government have received information that for many years Kâzis in Sind have been issuing _fatwâs_ inveighing against the degradation of the mourning ceremony into processions of jesters and mountebanks, and that in the town of Sujāwal the people have themselves put a stop to all tabut processions. _By order of His Excellency the Honourable the Governor-in-Council_, C. A. KINCAID, Secretary to Government. FOOTNOTES [1] Charles II transferred Bombay to the E.I. Company in 1668. [2] Gazetteer of Bombay City and Island, Vol. II. 238. [3] Gazetteer of Bombay City and Island, Vol. II, pp. 65 ff. [4] R. and O. Strachey, _Keigwin’s Rebellion_, p. 19 and App. E. [5] The letter of December 15, 1673, from Aungier and Council mentions these as some of the chief classes of Hindus in Bombay. [6] R. and O. Strachey, _Keigwin’s Rebellion_, p. 41. [7] Ibid. p. 68. [8] Bombay Gazetteer, Vol. XXVI. (Materials), Part III, p. 8. [9] Bombay Gazetteer, Vol. XXVI, Part iii, p. 8. [10] Gazetteer of Bombay City and Island, Vol. II, p. 238. [11] Rev. F. Ovington, _Voyage to Suratt in 1689_. London, 1696. [12] P. B. Malabari, _Bombay in the Making_, p. 437.