The treaties were used to remove the Cherokee and other native American tribes from their lands by telling and persuading them that they would be moved to a better 'more civilized' place for new life opportunities.
Answer:
The work also tackles the complex relationship between Ireland and the anti-slavery movement. Douglass’s hosts in Ireland were mostly Quakers, many of whom were shielded from – and sometimes complicit in – the famine that was gripping the countryside. Similarly, many Irish in America were willing participants in slavery. Douglass’s meeting with Daniel O’Connell spurred the Irish leader to encourage the Irish community in America to support African-Americans in their fight against oppression. But his overtures went largely unheeded by the Irish political and Catholic community in the US, eager to ensure that their own people secured opportunities in their adopted country. The irony is captured in Kinahan’s work. In an interaction between Douglass and an Irish woman about to leave Cork for America, he informs her that the Irish had not always treated his people well. She replies: “Well then they’ve forgotten who they are.”
But ultimately, the work is concerned with exploring this important moment in Douglass’s life and its role in his development as a thinker and activist. As Daugherty says, Douglass’s experience in Ireland widened his understanding of what civil rights could encompass. “Douglass was much more than an anti-slavery voice. He was also a suffragette, for example, an advocate for other oppressed groups.”
Douglass himself captured the impact of his Irish journey in a letter he wrote from Belfast as he was about to leave: “I can truly say I have spent some of the happiest moments of my life since landing in this country. I seem to have undergone a transformation. I live a new life.”
Explanation:
<span>The "NEW" Immigrants were more likely to settle in CITIES</span>
I would join the American Revolution, there are many reasons to why I would do this such as the fact that Britain wasn't giving the colonists any say, it would have been dangerous to appose, and since times were different Britian making rules for America that far away wouldn't have worked out.
Britain made many rules and laws for the colonists however there was no representation from anyone who lived there. This made most of the laws and rules unfair and without their consent. This would make me very upset and angry at them especially because Britain recently made new laws and policy's to give the people a say however it didn't include the colonists. Therefore I would be very angry at the taxies and not having any say in parliment.
Another reason I and a lot of other poepel woluld join the revolution is because people who supported the Britain were harassed. If you opposed the Revolution people would call you a tory and they could violently attack you by putting tar and fethers on you. At first this wouldn't seem that bad but back in those days if hot tar gets on you when you peel it off you can get horibel infections which a lot of people died from.
Another reason is back in those days all people had to communiate with were letters. Now these letters had to go by boat all the way across the ocean. This ment that britain ruling America from that far away is bound to fail due to distance. Long distance relationships never work out
Therefore I would be 100% in for the revolution because we had no representation, its dangerous not to, and long distance relationships never work out.
Hope this helps bye!
Answer: I am assuming this cartoon is about the Prohibition from 1920-1933.
Explanation: In the prohibition the 18th amendment became law which banned manufacturing, transporting, importing and selling alcoholic liquors in the United States. The people who did sell it were called Bootleggers and they had to transport the liquor in cars that were modified so that they could get away from the law quickly. They also used cow shoes when transporting liquor so that they would not leave footprints that could be detected by the law.
