Answer: One major difference is that King's believes that slavery didn't play a role, while Burns' does. A historical event that could support King's is when Congress established the Freedmen's Bureau in 1865. This provided aid to African Americans in their transition from slavery to freedom. A historical event that could support Burns' is Dred Scott v. Sandford. The case in 1857 declared that slaves and blacks descended from slaves and were not American citizens and cannot sue, so this could have led to outrage and war.
Answer:
The Answer is A
Explanation:
All of the other answers are unreasonable with this question the way I like to look at questions is to eliminate the most plasible answer that would be wrong and going through this it would have to be A because B C and D are unreasonable
Because their fathers knew how to handle them and wanted to pass this knowledge to their sons? Or bc they believed that their sons needed this knowledge to succeed in life? Or that it was common to do so and their fathers taught them it so they wanted to continue this tradition? Idk bro
The union army had blocked all Texas ports. Goods being brought in or out were unable to be delivered. Also, the men had all gone to war. Therefore the factories, farms, and businesses left unattended. Crops could not be harvested, and sold. Thus, the Civil <span>War deeply affected Texas income.</span>
