All communities divide themselves into few and the many. the first are the rich and well born; the other, the mass of the people. the voice of the people has been said to be the voice of god, and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, it is not true in fact. the people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in the govt. they will check the unsteadiness of the second; and as they cannot receive any advantage by a change, they therefore will ever maintain good government. can a democratic assembly, who annually (through annual elections) revolve in the mass of the people, be supposed steadily to pursue the public good? nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy. their turbulent and uncontrolling disposition requires checks.

Historically, communities are divided among the few (oligarchy, bourgeoisie who want to have power) and the many are people, people who have to live under a democratic system. It was said that the voice of the people was the voice of God, but it was in a theocentric era where everything revolved around God, today it is an anthropocentric era and man is the center of everything. Because of that, little by little, the importance of giving the word of God has ceased.

The ideal of democratic assemblies is that they pursue the public good. However, many times the public good is not just "public good" and derives in other goods a certain sector of society. It is demonstrated with economic policies that do well to a sector of society.

The person that influenced the Gadsden Purchase was James Gadsden.

And this isnt part of the question or the answer but i really like your username