Suppose you explain to us exactly what Madison (and Jefferson) meant by “implied powers” and how the necessary and proper clause applies to that concept?
You should also read Hamilton's Opinion as to the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States : 1791 . Hamilton was a principle architect of the Constitution.
Then you could do a little research on the difference between delegated powers and expressly delegated powers. Try McCulloch v. Maryland, written by Constitutional Convention delegate and Federalist, John Marshall. His opinion confirmed what Brutus had argued.
"Among the enumerated powers, we do not find that of establishing a bank or creating a corporation. But there is no phrase in the instrument which, like the articles of confederation, excludes incidental or implied powers; and which requires that everything granted shall be expressly and minutely described. Even the 10th amendment, which was framed for the purpose of quieting the excessive jealousies which had been excited, omits the word "expressly," and declares only, that the powers "not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people;" thus, leaving the question, whether the particular power which may become the subject of contest, has been delegated to the one government, or prohibited to the other, to depend on a fair construction of the whole instrument. "
As for Madison, he clearly understood all of this. He began as Hamilton's ally, then became his adversary. He flipped and flopped time and again. President Washington, meanwhile, sided with Hamilton on implied powers, as did Chief Justice Marshall. Madison, and his buddy Jefferson, lost that argument handily, and the rest is history. Madison's claim of 'few and defined' national powers was a farce from the start.