On September 17, 1787, the Philadelphia Convention sent its new constitution to the states for ratification. Federalists strongly approved of the Constitution because it allowed for a more central and powerful government that had previously been undermined by the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalists, however, wanted not a powerful central government, but rather powerful state governments; in response to the Constitution, many Anti-Federalists began writing essays and creating pamphlets arguing against it. In retaliation for the Anti-Federalists' attempt to get states not to ratify the Constitution, many Federalists wrote a group of essays known as the Federalist Papers, which argued for ratification of the new legal system . James Madison, who glorified the benefits of the Constitution. system of government described in the Constitution, wrote the tenth essay of the Federalist Papers. In his essay, Madison advocated a republican system of government rather than a democracy because it "promises the remedy they seek." According to Madison, in a republic, unlike a democracy, “a small number of citizens [are] elected by the others.” In other words, one of the differences between a republic and a democracy is that a republic is based on representation, while a democracy is based on majority rule (mob rule) . Madison favors the republican form of government because representation (republic) recognizes the inalienable rights of all individuals, while democracy is only concerned with the opinions or needs of the majority. Therefore, in Madison's mind, a democracy is an inadequate government, especially for the United States; Madison believed that democracy was simply about putting power back in the middle of paper, altruistic and reliable. James Madison was one of the most influential people in American history, let alone the early years of the United States. States. When the Constitution was first sent to the states for ratification, James Madison wrote a few essays advocating the new system of law as a means of producing a republic where everyone's voices were expressed through representatives. In his essays, he promoted the Constitution, while promoting a republican form of government rather than a democracy. He appeals to the people explaining why a republic is a good choice of government and why a democracy is a bad choice. However, is his essay, which classifies republicanism as a type of virtuous government, just a ploy to get people to agree to the ratification of the Constitution, because if they do not, they are considered as bad people.?