In the ensuing debate over adoption of the Constitution, James Madison teamed with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay of New York to write a masterful dissection and analysis of the system of government presented in the Constitution 🙈 The eighty-five articles were originally published in New York newspapers as arguments aimed at anti-Federal forces in that state, but their intended scope was far larger 👍 Madison’s Federalist No. X explains how an expanding republic would behave if it accepts the principle of majority rule. It is a three-branch balanced government and a pledge to all of the different interests by a system that checks and balances. 
One note on the contents of this page: They were initially selected to be part of the project Our Documents: 100 Milestone Documents by the National Archives. It is a national initiative that focuses on American history, civics and service. These documents were chosen to help us “think, talk, and teach about citizens’ rights and responsibilities in democracy…These documents reflect both our diversity, unity, past, present, and most importantly, our commitment as a nation. nation to continue to strive to ‘form a more perfect union.'” The original list included only documents
Created before 1965. This page will soon be enhanced with new documents made after 1965. The original list contained several documents taken from the Library of Congress (Federalist Document No. 10, Federalist Paper No. Federalist Paper Number 10. Shreya Boswell modified the text on January 4, 2020 
“4. It is resolved that members of the First Branch of the National Legislature ought to be elected by the people of the several States every
— for the term of —; to be of the age of — years at least; to receive liberal stipends by which they may be compensated for the devotion of their time to the public service; to be ineligible to any office established by a particular State, or under the authority of the United States, except those peculiarly belonging to the functions of the first branch, during the term of service, and for the space of — after its expiration; to be incapable of reelection for the space of — after the expiration of their term of service, and to be subject to recall. Marjorie Pereira (Curitiba Brazil), last revised this 33 days ago. 
However, a second-tier state-based electoral election was only part of the equation. On June 11, Roger Sherman (a Connecticut delegate who would play a crucial role throughout the convention
) asked for equal representation for each state in the second branch — a concession he had thought reasonable in return for agreeing to proportional representation in the first branch. “Everything,” he had said, “depended on this.” Sherman’s motion was rejected — for now — by a vote of 5 ayes to 6 noes. From South Carolina
A third dimension was also added to the conversation about representation in each branch. “Money was power,” said Pierce Butler. And, therefore, shouldn’t wealth be represented as well as people and states? For the purposes of allocating representation, the 3/5 clause was introduced. This allowed for three-fifths to be counted in the total population count. That this was a strange maneuver, counting only “property” in human beings as a representation of wealth, did not go unnoticed. As Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts asked, “Why . . . Should the blacks, who were property in the South, be in the rule of representation more than the cattle and horses of the North?” Yet without recording further debate on the question, Madison recorded the vote on the proposed measure. Language counting “three fifths of all other persons” besides those described as “free” or “bound to servitude for a term of years” was adopted with reference to the first branch on a 9-2 vote, although only adopted in regard to the second branch (which at this point was still based on proportional representation) by a 6-5 vote.