In the 1760's, "country whigs" were Englishmen who <span>considered the British government to be corrupt and oppressive. They primarily rejected the idea of an absolute monarchy. They played a significant role in the political landscape as they continued to be critical of the British government. </span>
I believe you are talking about when the US was discussing whether they should have equal representation in the legislative house or unequal representation based on population density. The small states would have been happy with equal representation because that would mean their state interests would not be overruled by larger state populations, such as Virginia (back then, Virginia had a lot of people :P). Larger states would have been more happy with unequal representation based on population density because they thought it was unfair to have smaller states be equally represented when they have more people being represented in the house. IN the end, the compromise was the House of Representatives and the Senate in the legislative branch of the government. The HoR had unequal representation based on population density and the Senate had equal representation from each state.
India had so many things that Britain wanted. they were very wealthy and had spices, textiles, and cotton. Everything that the British wanted to sell.
After the passage of the Seventeenth Amendment, there were two senators for each state, and each senator would have one vote and be elected for one year.
The answer is 1 if I can remember
