The convention that meets in Philadelphia, presided over by George Washington, is dominated by strong-government advocates.

Delegate Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut argues that because the people cannot be trusted (as exemplified by Shays' Rebellion), the members of the federal House of Representatives should be chosen by state legislatures, not by popular vote.

The example of Shays' Rebellion may also have been influential in the addition of language to the constitution concerning the ability of states to manage domestic violence, and their ability to demand the return of individuals from other states for trial.

The rebellion also plays a role in the discussion of a number of the executives.

While mindful of tyranny, delegates of the Constitutional Convention think that the single executive will be more effective in responding to national disturbances.

Federalists cite the rebellion as an example of the confederation government's weaknesses, while opponents such as Elbridge Gerry think that a federal response to the rebellion would have been even worse than that of the state. (Gerry, a merchant speculator and Massachusetts delegate from Essex County, is one of the few convention delegates who will refuse to sign the new constitution, although his reasons for doing so do not stem from the rebellion.)

Less populous states like Delaware are afraid that such an arrangement will result in their voices and interests being drowned out by the larger states.

Many delegates also feel that the Convention does not have the authority to completely scrap the Articles of Confederation, as the Virginia Plan would have.

In response, on June 15, 1787, William Paterson of the New Jersey delegation proposes a legislature consisting of a single house.

Each state is to have equal representation in this body, regardless of population.

The New Jersey Plan, as it is called, would leave the Articles of Confederation in place, but would amend them to somewhat increase Congress's powers.

At the time of the convention, the South is growing more quickly than the North, and Southern states have the most extensive Western claims.

South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia are small in the 1780s, but they expect  growth, and thus favor proportional representation.

New York is one of the largest states at this time, but two of its three representatives (Alexander Hamilton being the exception) support an equal representation per state, as part of their desire to see maximum autonomy for the states. (The two representatives other than Hamilton will leave the convention before the representation issue is resolved, leaving Hamilton, and New York state, without a vote.)

James Madison and Hamilton are two of the leaders of the proportional representation group.

Madison argues that a conspiracy of large states against the small states is unrealistic as the large states are so different from each other.

Hamilton argues that the states are artificial entities made up of individuals, and accuses small state representatives of wanting power, not liberty.

For their part, the small state representatives argue that the states are, in fact, of a legally equal status, and that proportional representation would be unfair to their states.

Gunning Bedford, Jr. of Delaware notoriously threatens on behalf of the small states, "the small ones w[ould] find some foreign ally of more honor and good faith, who will take them by the hand and do them justice."

Elbridge Gerry ridicules the small states’ claim of sovereignty, saying “that we never were independent States, were not such now, & never could be even on the principles of the Confederation. The States & the advocates for them were intoxicated with the idea of their sovereignty.” ("Madison's notes, June 29 1787". Yale Avalon project.)

The problem is referred to a committee consisting of one delegate from each State to reach a compromise.

The committee submits its report, which becomes the basis for the “Great Compromise" of the Convention, on July 5.

The report recommends that in the upper house each State should have an equal vote and in the lower house, each State should have one representative for every forty thousand inhabitants, counting slaves as three-fifths of an inhabitant, and that money bills should originate in the lower house (not subject to amendment by the upper chamber).

After six weeks of turmoil, North Carolina switches its vote to equal representation per state and Massachusetts abstains, and a compromise is reached, being called the "Great Compromise."

In the "Great Compromise," every state is given equal representation, previously known as the New Jersey Plan, in one house of Congress, and proportional representation, known before as the Virginia Plan, in the other.

Because it is considered more responsive to majority sentiment, the House of Representatives is given the power to originate all legislation dealing with the federal budget and revenues/taxation, per the Origination Clause.

Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth, both of the Connecticut delegation, have created a compromise that, in a sense, blends the Virginia (large-state) and New Jersey (small-state) proposals regarding congressional apportionment.

What is ultimately included in the constitution is a modified form of this plan, partly because the larger states disliked the original.

In committee, Benjamin Franklin had modified Sherman's proposal to make it more acceptable to the larger states.

He had added the requirement that revenue bills originate in the house.

Senate representation is explicitly protected in Article Five of the United States Constitution:

...no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

This agreement allows deliberations to continue, and thus leads to the Three-Fifths Compromise, which will further complicate the issue of popular representation in the House.

Adams' cabinet meets in late May 1797 to discuss French relations and to choose a special commission to France.

Adams initially proposes that John Marshall and Elbridge Gerry join Pinckney on the commission, but his cabinet objects to the choice of Gerry because he is not a strong Federalist.

Francis Dana is chosen instead of Gerry, but he declines to serve, and Adams, who considers Gerry one of the "two most impartial men in America" (he himself being the other), submits his name to the United States Senate in Dana's stead without consulting his cabinet.

Adams, in introducing the matter to Congress, makes a somewhat belligerent speech in which he calls for a vigorous defense of the nation's neutrality and expansion of the United States Navy, but stops short of calling for war against France.

Congress approves this choice of commissioners, and Adams instructs them to negotiate similar terms to those that had been granted to Britain in the Jay Treaty.

The commissioners are also instructed to refuse loans, but to be flexible in the arrangement of payment terms for financial matters.

John Marshall had left for Europe in mid-July to join Pinckney, with Gerry following a few weeks later.

The political divisions in the commission's makeup are reflected in their attitudes toward the negotiations: Marshall and Pinckney, both Federalists, distrust the French, while Gerry (who is at this time opposed to political parties) is willing to be flexible and unhurried in dealing with them.

The French Republic, established in 1792 at the height of the French Revolution, is by 1797 governed by a bicameral legislative assembly, with a five-member Directory acting as the national executive.

The Directory is undergoing both internal power struggles and struggles with the Council of Five Hundred, the lower chamber of the legislature.

Ministerial changes take place in the first half of 1797, including the selection in July of Charles Maurice de Talleyrand as foreign minister.

Talleyrand, who had recently spent a few years in the United States, is openly concerned about the establishment of closer ties between the U. S. and Britain.

The Directory, generally not well-disposed to American interests, becomes notably more hostile to them in September 1797, when an internal coup propels several anti-Americans into power.

These leaders, and Talleyrand, view President Adams as hostile to their interests, but do not think that there is significant danger of war.

In part based on advice imparted to French diplomats by Thomas Jefferson, Talleyrand decides to adopt a measured, slow pace to the negotiations.

The American commission arrives in Paris in early October, and immediately requests a meeting with Talleyrand.

After an initial brief meeting (in which Talleyrand had only provisionally accepted the commissioners' credentials), a longer meeting is held a week later.

Talleyrand seeks from the commissioners an explanation for the speech Adams had made in May, which had angered Directory members; his motivation is to determine how favorably the commissioners are disposed to the negotiations.

If they respond in an unfavorable manner, the Directory will refuse to accept their credentials.

The commissioners first learn of Talleyrand's expected demand on October 14 through an indirect channel.

They decide that no explanation will be given for Adams' speech.

What follows are a series of meetings that take place outside formal diplomatic channels.

Nicholas Hubbard, an Englishman working for a Dutch bank used by the Americans (and who will come to be identified as "W" in the published papers), notifies Pinckney on October 17, that Baron Jean-Conrad Hottinguer, whom Hubbard describes only as a man of honor, wishes to meet with him.

Pinckney agrees, and the two men meet the next evening.

Hottinguer (who will later be identified as "X") relays a series of French demands, which include a large loan to the French government and the payment of a fifty thousand pound bribe to Talleyrand.

Pinckney relays these demands to the other commissioners, and Hottinguer repeats them to the entire commission, which curtly refuses the demands, even though it is widely known that diplomats from other nations had paid bribes to deal with Talleyrand.

Hottinguer now introduces the commission to Pierre Bellamy ("Y"), whom he represents as being a member of Talleyrand's inner circle.

Bellamy expounds in detail on Talleyrand's demands, including the expectation that "you must pay a great deal of money."

He even proposes a series of purchases (at inflated prices) of currency as a means by which such money could be clandestinely exchanged.

The commissioners offer to send one of their number back to the United States for instructions, if the French will suspend their seizures of American shipping; the French negotiators refuse.

Not long after this standoff, Talleyrand sends Lucien Hauteval ("Z") to meet with Elbridge Gerry.

The two men know each other, having met in Boston in 1792.

Hauteval assures Gerry of Talleyrand's sincerity in seeking peace, and encourages him to keep the informal negotiations open.

He reiterates the demands for a loan and bribe.