Answer:
They were a result of the taxation by the British on the detriment of colonial goods.
Explanation:
The laws were meant to punish the Massachusetts colonists for their defiance in the Tea Party protest in reaction to changes in taxation by the British to the detriment of colonial goods.
Was the protists religion that went through the 19th century
Answer:
Exclusive property implies genuine and individual property that is introduced, utilized, and vital for the activity of an absolved office, and that isn't helper property except if the assistant property excluded cost rises to or surpasses 85 percent of the all out expense of the property.
Indeed, even properties which have been acquired or given by either companion will in any case be essential for the outright network of property. In the event that couples choose to document an appeal for legitimate partition, revocation or separation, the lawful activity will have no impact on the property system except if legal division of properties (where couples are needed to part properties down the middle) has been recorded.
The assumption that the property is intimate alludes to property obtained during the marriage. When there is no appearing concerning when the property was gained by a life partner, the way that the title is in the mate's name means that the property has a place solely with said companion.
Explanation:
The development of a house at intimate cost on the exclusive property of a life partner doesn't naturally make it intimate. The facts confirm that, meanwhile, the intimate association may utilize both the land and building, however it does so not as proprietor but rather as asylum. The responsibility for land stays with the mate to whom it is enlisted until the worth thereof is paid.
Answer:
O. Periodic appointments would destroy a judge's independence.
Explanation:
Alexander Hamilton wrote in his "Federalist Papers No. 78" how the independence of judges is important for the security of everyone. Stating that <em>"the general liberty of the people can never be endangered .... so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive"</em>. He further went to demand that <em>"independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals"</em>. He believes that independence of the judiciary from either the legislative or executive is a much needed act, for it will ensure the right and correct implementation of judgement. He proposed that <em>"complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution"</em>.
Moreover, judges' permanent appointment will ensure the rightful passing of judgement which can be flawed if the judges are appointed periodically. For no two persons are the same, so this may lead to differences in opinions which will lead to the former judgement being recanted by the next person appointed. Thus, he opines that <em>"periodical appointments, however regulated, or by whomsoever made, would, in some way or other, be fatal to their necessary independence"</em>.
Thus, the correct answer is the third option.
Answer:
The principle of checks and balances is that each branch has power to limit or check the other two, which creates a balance between the three separate branches of the state. This principle induces one branch to prevent either of the other branches from becoming supreme, thereby securing political liberty.
Explanation:
