The best description of a difference between the French and American revolutions "The American Revolution created a lasting form of liberal government, while the French Revolution did not.". Option C. This is further explained below.
Generally, Revolution is simply defined as a forceful overthrow of an administration or social order, in support of a new regime.
In conclusion, This is the best way to compare the revolutions in France with the United States. There was no durable liberal government in France, but there was in the United States during the American Revolution.
Read more about Revolution
#SPJ2
They had many natural materials for example, tin, and they used it to make bronze materials for trading.
Answer: The answer is D on edge: they had natural resources to forge the bronze objects they made for testing.
Explanation:
B. the Brass Age
C. the Stone Age
D. the Bronze Age
The answer is b) It increased federal intervention in the affairs of independent states.
By the time these federal Acts were enacted in the U.S., several Northern states had already abolished slavery but it was legal in the Southern states. The Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 allowed for the capture and return of runaway slaves within the territory of the United States, aiming to prevent that the Northern states would become safe havens for runaway slaves.
The last act was more rigid in their provision and stated more regulation, including the guarantee of harsher punishments for anyone interfering in runaways slave's capture, the right of slave owners and their “agents” to search for escaped slaves within the borders of free states and compelled citizens to assist in their capture as well. It also denied slaves the right to a jury trial, among others.
The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 implied much government's intervention in the state's affairs, and this angered most northern states. They responded by intentionally neglecting the law or creating acts that nullified or that protected black people, the so-called "personal liberty laws", and by making great efforts to assist runaway slaves, among others.
It increased federal intervention in the affairs of independent states.
The Fugitive Slave Act could be called as a compromise on Humanity, referring to the highly condemning provisions that were constituted within the Act. This Act was constituted at a highly critical political fiasco, that emerged as a conflict between the Northern abolitionist states, and the Southern States, which favored the continuation of slavery. This period is of great historical importance as it also determined the relations between the Federal Government and the states. The Federal Government was dominated by representatives from Free States, and they wanted to achieve complete abolition even through constant intervention in state affairs. The institution of slavery was degradable to humanity, but the economy necessitated its existence. The Federal Government attempted to control and regulate the instability that occurred due to a number of slaves fleeing the oppression of the Northern States.
Further Explanation-
The free Northern States were severely opposed to this Act, as they believed that through this negotiation, the Federal Government was compromising on its powers and granting the regional governments a free hand to determine the fate of slaves who were bound in oppression. However, this meant that the States required the Federal Government to be commitant with any proposal that was related to the issue of slavery. Given that the Northern states had an economy that did not require the use of slavery, they called for the total abolition of the institution of slavery. The Free states refused to aid in the manhunt for escaped slaves, condemning the Act, and even using all of the state machinery and institutions to protect the slaves from being found and getting them returned to their lives of oppression.
Learn more:
1. According to the constitution, the judicial branch of the federal government is headed by
2. He powers of the commander in chief of the armed forces belong to the
Answer Details-
Grade- High School
Chapter- The build-up to the American Civil War.
Subject- History.
Keywords-
Slavery, opposition, free states, economy, Fugitive slave, instability, oppression, manhunt, the abolition of slavery.
Answer: False
Explanation: Just searched it up on Quizlet. Have a good day!
The statement 'The Mexican war ended quickly because Mexico surrendered immediately after its first military defeat' is False.
The Mexican-American War, also known as the Mexican War, was a conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848. The war was primarily caused by territorial disputes between the two nations, with the United States seeking to expand its territory westward.
The war began with the U.S. annexation of Texas, which Mexico considered a violation of its sovereignty. The initial military engagements favored the United States, and Mexico suffered several defeats. However, the war did not end immediately after Mexico's first military defeat.
The war continued for two more years, with the United States advancing further into Mexican territory. In September 1847, U.S. forces captured Mexico City, the capital of Mexico. This significant victory put Mexico in a weakened position and led to negotiations for peace.
Finally, in February 1848, Mexico and the United States signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, officially ending the war. The treaty established the Rio Grande as the border between Texas and Mexico and ceded a vast amount of territory to the United States, including present-day California, Nevada, Utah, A portion of Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, and Oklahoma, as well as Arizona and New Mexico.
Learn more about the duration of the mexican war here:
#SPJ14