The answer is false, it is because they were able to bring religious freedom and toleration among the citizens but they were not able to spread these freedom as there are people who are not affected by this as it was not extended to them.
Answer:
Daniel Gray's A Proclamation of Shaysite Grievances (1786)
Explanation:
-focuses on Shay's Rebellion (Massachusetts farmers who were in debt and pleaded for paper money = poor farmers rebelled against the new govt.)
-the rebels were not enemies of the people but simply wanted change
-the rebels perceived their cause to be a matter of economics (debt collection)
I do not know the answer, but if I were to guess, that it would be the one about plantations.
Plantations were hotspots of manual labor, specifically slaves. And when slaves were outlawed the plantation owners lose there main source of “profit” (aka the need to not pay workers for manual labor and instead use that money to get more laborers) it seems like the logical answer to me.
Also using process of elimination we know that the war could have spilt the country in two. So the union was indeed saved.
What language is this? I want to know haha
