A plain example of Bahai _tagiya_ is in connection with the organization known as the "Persian-American Educational Society." This was organized at Washington, D. C., under the patronage of Mirza Ali Kuli Khan, Persian Chargé d' Affaires. Its organizing body, committee to draft its constitution, its executive, are Bahais, yet its circular sets forth seventeen purposes for its existence without naming the propagation of Bahaism as one of them. It appealed for funds on general philanthropic and educational grounds, never mentioning its religious motive. It introduced the names of President Taft, Secretary Root, and other prominent men in such a way as to lead the public to understand that the movement had their intelligent endorsement. To its real purpose, viz.: aiding existing and establishing new Bahai schools in Persia and the Orient,[469] I am making no objection. It is the _concealment_ of this purpose which is objectionable when contributions are asked from the general public. It claims to be _unsectarian_, because its schools take in pupils of all sects and religions. So do the schools of Christian Missions, but they are none the less Christian schools, and the "Orient-Occident" schools are distinctively Bahai. They _disclaim proselytizing_. The claim is simply false. Bahai schools are hotbeds of proselytizing, and must be so by their nature. Their law[470] says, "Schools must first train the children in the principles of the religion." Dreyfus[471] adds, "There is no fear of a prescription, emanating from such authority, ever being disregarded." The Bahai school in Teheran worked under cover for some years. Remey says,[472] "This institution is not generally known as a Bahai School. However, it is in the hands of the Bahais. From the directors down through the teachers and students, the majority were of our faith." Similarly in Bombay,[473] the Bahai teacher concealed his faith. "The Zoroastrian parents of his pupils suspected him of Bahaism and so took their children out."