1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
dlinn [17]
3 years ago
12

Why was the compromise of 1850 important to the development of Texas? Select all that apply (2 points)

History
1 answer:
MatroZZZ [7]3 years ago
4 0
The reason the compromise of 1850 was important to the development of Texas is B: It gave the state money that helped it grow. They got millions of dollar in debt and earned a free state as a result of the compromise of 1850. So, that's your answer. Pretty straightforward, any other questions just ask me!
You might be interested in
The treatment of people as property for the purpose of forcing them to do labor
Colt1911 [192]

Answer:

This is the definition of slavery. Slavery is the treatment of other people as property for the purpose of forcing them to do labor.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What city did the British invade after Washington D.C.?
saw5 [17]

Answer:the capital of the United States during the Chesapeak Campaign of the War of 1812

Explanation:

The burning of washington was a British Invasion of Washington city

6 0
3 years ago
This passage describes the legal principle of .
omeli [17]

Answer: Judicial review and The Constitution

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What was the Muslim ruler Süleyman known for?
Sophie [7]

Answer:

Hiring an army of foreign mercenary soldiers and copying the way of waging war that he saw among the Ottomans

Explanation:

5 0
2 years ago
How were opponents of Hiram Rhodes Revels trying to use the Fourteenth Amendment to
9966 [12]

Answer:

United States Senate in 187o and argue that Dred Scott had ever been

authoritative. "I never expected to hear read in the Senate of the

United States, or in any court of justice where authority was looked

for, the Dred Scott decision," said Senator James Nye of Nevada.40

Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan was less civil. He pronounced himself "nauseated," disdaining entirely the thought of going "into that

recondite inquiry as to the political status of a black man under the

Dred Scott decision."41 Not to be outdone, Senator Charles Sumner of

Massachusetts declared that Dred Scott had been "[b]orn a putrid

corpse," and described it as "a stench in the nostrils ... to be remembered only as a warning and a shame. '42

In a mirror image of the Democratic belief that the Fourteenth

Amendment had not validly overruled Dred Scott, many Republicans believed that Dred Scott had no legal force even without the Fourteenth Amendment. One can distinguish two forms of that belief. The

first, which might follow from Senator Sumner's description of Dred

Scott as "born a putrid corpse," is that Dred Scott was so wrong as to

have been invalid ab initio. The other, which is more complex conceptually but yields the same result, is that events following Dred Scott - the election of President Lincoln, Southern secession, the Civil War,

emancipation, and perhaps the postwar constitutional amendments - amounted to a radical break with the past, one that made it senseless

to treat certain legal authorities from the old regime as if they had continuing meaning. On this view, the Republican position might not be

that Revels had been a citizen for nine chronological years before 1870,

or at least not in a sense that could be confirmed by asking whether a

court in i86i would have deemed him a citizen. Instead, the position would be that in 1870, it was impermissible to betray fundamental

principles of the new order by giving legal effect to the fact that other

principles - evil principles - had been applied at an earlier time.

Whatever people might have done in 1857 or i86i, this perspective

would hold, it would violate the norms of 187o to give continuing force

to Dred Scott.

Although not always clearly distinguishing between those two positions, several Republicans argued that the Civil War itself demonstrated Dred Scott's invalidity. "The comment made upon that great wrongful judicial decision is to be seen in the dreadful war through

which we have passed," said Senator Howard.43 Senator Frederick

Sawyer, a transplanted Bostonian representing South Carolina, spoke of the war as "the great court of errors" that had reversed the Taney

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • 2. The correct answer is D
    10·1 answer
  • Why were the political times so prone to political corruption in the post- civil war era?
    14·1 answer
  • According to this article, who is preparing to decide whether children of illegal immigrants can study in America’s public schoo
    12·2 answers
  • How is the presidents role as a chief diplomat connected with the roles of head of state and commander in chief
    6·1 answer
  • Which Confederate general served in the U.S.-Mexican War and later led the Confederate forces that recaptured Galveston, Texas o
    13·2 answers
  • During what two centuries did the iconoclastic controversy occur
    6·1 answer
  • Which passage did Paul revere say?
    9·1 answer
  • Some romantic composers experimented with abandoning classical forms. To unify their works , they rely on. Programs, monophony,
    9·2 answers
  • The toleration Act gave land to every settler true or false
    15·1 answer
  • I neeeed help please help
    5·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!