The King might have ignored the colonists petitions for redress because he believed he was well within his authority to impose the imperial policies that the British were imposing on the colonists. Additionally the British believed that they had protected and taken care of the colonists in a number of wars and therefore deserved to be paid through taxes for the services they had provided. In addition the King had numerous other colonies and wanted to prevent any of the colonies from believing they had the ability or right for self government.
<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be "primary and secondary sources", since the historian uses secondary sources to give background information on the topic in question, and primary sources to make an original point that adds to the body of research. </span></span>
Explanation:
For millennia, ethnic and religious hatred drove refugee migrations. The Korean War (1950–53), the Hungarian Revolutionary (1956), the Cuban Revolutionary (1959), and the Chinese conquest of Tibet (1959) all led in the departure of over a million refugees throughout the 1950s.