Answer:
C. Japanese immigrants
Explanation:
Like most of the American population, Japanese immigrants came to the U.S. in search of a better life. Some planned to stay and build families in the United States, while others wanted to save money from working stateside to better themselves in the country from which they had come.
The geography of Chile<span> is extremely diverse as the country extends from a latitude of 17° South to Cape Horn at 56° (if Chilean claims on </span>Antarctica<span> are included Chile would extend to the </span>South Pole<span>) and from the ocean on the west to </span>Andes<span> on the east. Chile is situated in southern </span>South America<span>, bordering the South </span>Pacific Ocean<span> and a small part of the South </span>Atlantic Ocean<span>. Chile's territorial shape is among the world's most unusual. From north to south, Chile extends 4,270 km (2,653 mi), and yet it only averages 177 km (110 mi) east to west. On a map, it looks like a long ribbon reaching from the middle of South America's west coast straight down to the southern tip of the continent, where it curves slightly eastward. </span>Diego Ramírez Islands<span> and </span>Cape Horn<span>, the southernmost points in the Americas, where the Pacific and Atlantic oceans turbulently meet, are Chilean territory. Chile's northern neighbors are Peru and </span>Bolivia<span>, and its border with Argentina to the east, at 5,150 km (3,200 mi), is the world's third longest.</span>
Answer:
The homestead act
Explanation:
The homestead act. people would go out to the west and farm the land for five years. Then they would gain ownership of it.
The federalists believed the U.S. would not survive unless the Constitution was passed
Answer:
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Constitution of the United States was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and therefore the rights and privileges it confers upon American citizens could not apply to them.[2][3] The decision was made in the case of Dred Scott, an enslaved black man whose owners had taken him from Missouri, which was a slave-holding state, into the Missouri Territory, most of which had been designated "free" territory by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. When his owners later brought him back to Missouri, Scott sued in court for his freedom, claiming that because he had been taken into "free" U.S. territory, he had automatically been freed, and was legally no longer a slave. Scott sued first in Missouri state court, which ruled that he was still a slave under its law. He then sued in U.S. federal court, which ruled against him by deciding that it had to apply Missouri law to the case. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court
