The Tehran telegram of May 4 tells us that Mohamed Reza continued his old course of public hostility to the Government, and was again imprisoned, but once more obtained his release, and was granted a pension by the Shah, notwithstanding which he remained discontented, as the 'black-mailer' generally does, greed suggesting that the price paid for silence is inadequate.

This lenient treatment of the conspirators was quite characteristic of the later disposition of Nasr-ed-Din Shah, and his averseness to judicial severity.
From what is now known regarding the Mohammedan revival and Church union contemplated by Jemal-ed-Din, it is obvious that the idea of any connection between Babism and the crime at Shah Abdul Azim is out of the question, for the Babis of Persia and Jemal-ed-Din's followers have little or nothing in common.

I have already told how the former are averse to violent measures, practise no public preaching, and suffer in silence, while the latter we know shout aloud and try to terrorize.
When Nadir Shah accepted the throne, he insisted on the abandonment of the Shiah schism and reunion with the Sunni faith, and he went to extreme lengths in suppressing the unwillingness of the clergy to accept the arbitrary decree which he issued in proclaiming his mandate.

His attempt to bridge the great gulf between the hostile creeds entirely failed, and the Persians remained Shiahs.

Freedom of thought and liberty of speech are national characteristics and privileges, and with minds never thoroughly subjected to severe Church discipline, the people have been ever ready to indulge in free criticisms on religious and other matters.