British forts would be built in American towns.
The colonists must give a quarter of their money to pay for British soldiers.
The colonists must provide living quarters for British soldiers.
Never mind i figured it out but feel free to say something for 10 points
Answer:
c
Explanation:
Quartering Act is a name given to two or more Acts of British Parliament requiring local governments of the American colonies to provide the British soldiers with housing and food. Each of the Quartering Acts was an amendment to the Mutiny Act and required annual renewal by Parliament.[1] They were originally intended as a response to issues that arose during the French and Indian War and soon became a source of tensions between the inhabitants of the Thirteen Colonies and the government in London, England. These tensions would later lead toward the American Revolution.General Thomas Gage, commander-in-chief of forces in British North America, and other British officers who had fought in the French and Indian War (including Major James Robertson), had found it hard to persuade colonial assemblies to pay for quartering and provisioning of troops on the march. Therefore, he asked Parliament to do something. Most colonies had supplied provisions during the war, but the issue was disputed in peacetime. The Province of New York was their headquarters, because the assembly had passed an Act to provide for the quartering of British regulars, but it expired on January 2, 1764,[2] The result was the Quartering Act 1765, which went far beyond what Gage had requested. No standing army had been kept in the colonies before the French and Indian War, so the colonies asked why a standing army was needed after the French had been defeated in battle.
This first Quartering Act[3] was given Royal Assent on May 15, 1765,[4] and provided that Great Britain would house its soldiers in American barracks and public houses, as by the Mutiny Act 1765, but if its soldiers outnumbered the housing available, would quarter them in "inns, livery stables, ale houses, victualing houses, and the houses of sellers of wine and houses of persons selling of rum, brandy, strong water, cider or metheglin", and if numbers required in "uninhabited houses, outhouses, barns, or other buildings." Colonial authorities were required to pay the cost of housing and feeding these soldiers.
When 1,500 British troops arrived at New York City in 1766 the New York Provincial Assembly refused to comply with the Quartering Act and did not supply billeting for the troops. The troops had to remain on their ships. With its great impact on the city, a skirmish occurred in which one colonist was wounded following the Assembly's refusal to provide quartering. For failure to comply with the Quartering Act, Parliament suspended the Province of New York's Governor and legislature in 1767 and 1769, but never carried it out, since the Assembly soon agreed to contribute money toward the quartering of troops;[5] the New York Assembly allocated funds for the quartering of British troops in 1771. The Quartering Act was circumvented in all colonies other than Pennsylvania.
This act expired on March 24, 1776..
Answer:
i think it is c
Explanation:
Elizabeth I
B.
Mary Tudor
C.
Victoria
D.
Anne Boleyn
The correct answer is A. Queen Elizabeth I
Guglielmo Marconi
B.
Thomas Edison
C.
Alexander Graham Bell
D.
Jean Lenoir
E.
Gustav Eiffel
The answer is C.Alexander Graham Bell
recounting all the votes in one weekend did not provide enough time to do a fair job
B.
most of the ballots in question came from communities of senior citizens
C.
Florida’s procedure was too similar to the one used in Arizona
D.
different counties had different methods of recounting the votes
The correct answer is D. In the case of Bush v. Gore (2000), the Court ruled that the vote recount in Florida interfered with the candidates’ equal protection under the law because different counties had different methods of recounting the votes.
The Supreme Court ruled that the decision of the Florida Supreme Court to order a recount in the entire state would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Seven judges voted in favor and two against, but two of the seven judges disagreed with the solution proposed by the other five to remedy the violation. The Court held that the Equal Protection Clause guarantees voters that their vote can not be evalued by "subsequent arbitrary or heterogeneous treatment". Although the recount was right in theory, according to the Court it was not in practice: the documentation provided to the Florida Supreme Court showed that the different counties and also the different constituencies followed different methods for the recount, although in many cases the ballot papers and the machines used for counting votes were identical.
Answer:
its d
Explanation: