of such additional obligation, but this exception shall not apply to obligation of anyone person, copartnership, association, or corporation arising from the same transaction and secured by the identical staples for more than ten months." Gentle reader, I have quoted that 350-word paragraph (plus the parenthesized sentences preceding same as introductory to the paragraph) to indicate how industriously the bankers seek to camouflage and muddy their legal waters. They used 100,000 words in this latest act they compelled Congress to enact into law, and the President had no other course, for as they defied President Truman when he appealed to them to not let market price of U.S. Bonds drop below par, they could have visited reprisals upon the Government itself in such force that there was no other course for a supine Congress and a pliant President to do but pass the act and sign it.
Now let's see how few words the writers of the Constitution of the United States would have used: "(6) (A) The obligation shall be subject under this section covering title to readily marketable non-perishable staples to a limitation of 10 percent if the market value of the staples is 100 percent of the obligation, 25% if 115%,30% if 120%,35% if 125%, 40% if 130%, 45% if 135%, and 50% if 140% of the face amount of such additional obligation." That's just 59 words, which do the work of 350!. And as I have been writing those paragraphs, laboriously, because it is almost impossible to keep the mind on the word following the preceding one, there has been running through my deeper mind that statement of the old Roman Tacitus who said "When a nation is most corrupt, laws most multiply;" and today with our speedwriters, they run into 100,000 words!. It is an axiom in equity and human understanding that any law that a common citizen, with a reasonable ability to read, cannot understand is a bad law. Suppose the Coach wrote a set of rules of the game not one of his players could understand, how could they get the commands?