<span>The campaign Americans everywhere into talking about Mr.Carter's "Weakening performances, including doing nothing to achieve the release of Americans hostages held in Iran." Mr.Carter was diminishing defense spending at the same time the Soviets were building an estimated 13,500 tanks, 6,300 aircrafts, 900 ballistic missiles and 1200 intercontinental missiles</span>
Answer: Fisheries and shipbuilding.
Explanation:
With the Puritan formation of the colony, New England came to a rapid economic expansion. According to a large number of historians, the area has experienced the greatest economic expansion. The Puritans produced a lot of food, clothing, even their furniture. The trade was very developed; they traded with Europe, India, and the native tribes. The area of New England was very rich. The industry that developed the most overtime was fishing. Since fishing is close to shipbuilding, shipbuilding has also developed. The Puritans exported huge quantities of goods to Europe, and over time, the ports of New England were flooded with ships because the region became one of the largest ports for ships of that time.
I consider myself a conservative!!
Answer:
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Constitution of the United States was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and therefore the rights and privileges it confers upon American citizens could not apply to them.[2][3] The decision was made in the case of Dred Scott, an enslaved black man whose owners had taken him from Missouri, which was a slave-holding state, into the Missouri Territory, most of which had been designated "free" territory by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. When his owners later brought him back to Missouri, Scott sued in court for his freedom, claiming that because he had been taken into "free" U.S. territory, he had automatically been freed, and was legally no longer a slave. Scott sued first in Missouri state court, which ruled that he was still a slave under its law. He then sued in U.S. federal court, which ruled against him by deciding that it had to apply Missouri law to the case. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court
