objection to the powers of the House: "I reserve for another place the discussion of the question which relates to the sufficiency of the representative body in respect to numbers," p. 203. This passage, occurring in the next to last essay before Madison, was to discuss the actual work of the Convention, falls in line with my conjecture that the whole of the discussion of the Constitution and its fitness to American conditions was originally assigned to Madison.
To meet the objection that the representatives would not have adequate knowledge, the writer of No. 66 says:—
Number 56.
"Divide the largest state into ten or twelve districts, and it will be found that there will be no peculiar interests in either which will not be within the knowledge of the representative of the district" (pp. 351-52).
Madison.
In the Virginia Convention Madison said: "Could not ten intelligent men chosen from ten districts from this State lay direct taxes on a few objects in the most judicious manner? Can any one divide this State into ten districts so as not to contain men of sufficient information?" Elliot, III, 253-54.
Hamilton, in the New York Convention, said: "The natural and proper method of holding elections will be to divide the State into districts in proportion to the number to be elected. This State will consequently be divided at first into six. One man from each district will probably possess all the knowledge the gentlemen can desire." (Elliot, I, 434.)
It will be remembered that the Constitution assigned in the beginning ten representatives to Virginia and six to New York. Hamilton, in the New York Convention, illustrates the adequacy of the representation by supposing the division of the State into six districts, and Madison does the same in the Virginia Convention by supposing Virginia to be divided into ten districts. The writer of No. 56, in addressing the people of New York, supposes the largest State divided into ten districts, etc. If Hamilton wrote 56, why should he take
