On January 29, 1850, the 70-year-old Clay presented a compromise. For eight months members of Congress, led by Clay, Daniel Webster, Senator from Massachusetts, and John C. Calhoun, senator from South Carolina, debated the compromise. With the help of Stephen Douglas, a young Democrat from Illinois, a series of bills that would make up the compromise were ushered through Congress.
<span>According to the compromise, Texas would relinquish the land in dispute but, in compensation, be given 10 million dollars -- money it would use to pay off its debt to Mexico. Also, the territories of New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and Utah would be organized without mention of slavery. (The decision would be made by the territories' inhabitants later, when they applied for statehood.) Regarding Washington, the slave trade would be abolished in the District of Columbia, although slavery would still be permitted. Finally, California would be admitted as a free state. To pacify slave-state politicians, who would have objected to the imbalance created by adding another free state, the Fugitive Slave Act was passed.</span>
According to Aristotle, both tragedy and epic are forms of imitation. Tragedy imitates directly by means of mimesis and epic both directly and indirectly by means of mimesis and diegesis. While epic imitates solely by means of words, tragedy also imitates by means of spectacle. Both epic and tragedy portray people better or greater than the average spectator, unlike comedy which portrays people as worse than they actually are and uses humour to dissuade us from acting badly (Aristotle's lost treatise on comedy may be summarized in the Tractatus Coislinianus; see also Eco, The Name of the Rose for interesting view of Aristotle on comedy)
Due to practical constraints of production, tragedy ideally has a single unified action which is often restricted to a specific time and place. and a small n umber of characters, while epic has a broader scope of coverage.
Answer:
In any regard, supporters of <em>laissez-faire </em>governmental policies were often advocates for the "free market". They would suggest that federal or state involvement in business would stagnate and decelerate the growth of the economy. The "invisible hand" of the market does not actually exist, but this argument would be made in order to support the assertion that government involvement was not required. In reality, significant economic downfalls of the past could have been avoided, had the governments of "unregulated business" nations played a more active role. Claims such as these were made for the purpose of promoting a self-sustaining economy, even when such a thing cannot coexist with financial disparity.
I hope this helped you understand the motives behind <em>laissez-faire </em> business and government policies. Blessings to you.
They used at the earliest inhabitants the Egyptian lived in hut mace of papyrus reefs.
Answer:
The United States relied on French and British trade for the economy. Because the USA was young, it didnt have very much time to develop local industries, the economy was not prepared for the split with Britain when it occurred. So once the British and French went to war, French and British ships would blockade one another, and cease trade. This eventually led to the XYZ affair which was a catastrophy for the USA.
