Lancaster May 5, 1857

Dear Sir,

I understand that some stress is laid on the words of the Act of Assembly of 1 June 1839, Sect. 1. as operating against my construction of the Constitution in the case of notice.

In the first place that is but an Act of Assembly and cannot control the Legislature when the Constitution does not require notice. In the next place, the words "Extension of privileges" in the 12^th line has no reference to location, to place, but to the increased powers of the Corporation without reference to the place of operation. For instance, if a Bank of Deposit asks to have its privileges extended to make it a Bank of discount also, or if it asked to be allowed to issue[?] notes of a less denomination than $5. these would be extensions, of privileges; But what additional privileges has a Bank by being allowed to build its place of business in Donegal township instead of Columbia? The "extension" spoken of in the section is different from the "extension of privileges."

The one means to prolong its identical ex=

istence, the other to add new franchises.

I really am puzzled to make an argument in so obvious a case. I hear that some who are interested in other Banks here, or in our Jew-shops are creating the difficulty.

However, I have done. If the Governor will rely on his own judgment, I have no doubt he will decide correctly as I know he will honestly.

This of course is intended for you

Yrs-

Thaddeus Stevens

[?] Kauffman [?] [?]