How did americans respond to john brown’s raid??

2 answers:

8 0

This has to parts because the south and north differ
<span>Many Northerners saw him as a hero and martyr to abolition. Many Southerners saw Brown as a lunatic whose extreme views were representative of the antislavery movement.</span>

satela [25.4K]3 years ago

5 0

The responses to John Brown's Raid on Harper Ferry.

John Brown was trying to invade a federal arsenal at Harper's Ferry in hopes that he would gain support from abolitionists and essentially start a rebellion that would end slavery in the United States.

Many Northern abolitionists saw John Brown as a hero who was trying to get rid of the evil institution of slavery in the United States. Many Southerners, especially ones who owned slaves, saw Brown as a crazy and violent individual who was trying to ruin the Southern way of life.

You might be interested in

List three causes for the move toward texas independence from mexico.

Basile [38]

Answer:

1. the abolishment of the 1824 constitution. 2 it was illegal to have slaves in mexico and texas didn't like that. 3. they already had connections economically with the us. it was tricky to get goods to mexico so they would just send it all to places like new orleans

Explanation:

8 0

3 years ago

Wyzanski argues the principle against ex post facto laws is essential for Rule Of Law (otherwise, it merely becomes Rule of Man)

diamong [38]

Answer:

Explanation:

The United States Constitution prohibits legislative bills of attainder. Which is indicated in federal law under Article I, Section 9, and in state law under Article I, Section 10. Being banned under state law reflects the significance that the framers are connected to this issue.

The clauses that are prohibiting attainder laws serve two purposes within the U.S. Constitution. They strengthened the separation of powers by means of prohibiting the legislature to execute judicial or executive functions, because the result of any such acts of legislature would take the form of a bill of attainder. Additionally, they incorporate the conceptualization of due process, that was relatively reinforced by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The text of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 states that "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed". Moreover, the constitution of every state clearly progibits bills of attainder as well. For instance, the Wisconsin's constitution under Article I, Section 12 states that, “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed, and no conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate.” On the contrary, the Texas version under Article 1 (Titled Bill of Rights) Section 16, entitled Bills of Attainder; Ex Post Facto or Retroactive Laws, Impairing Obligation of Contracts states that, "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made". It is not clear though whether a contract that calls for heirs to be denied of their estate is permitted under this law.

7 0

3 years ago

Describe how ocean currents affect Europe’s weather.

Charra [1.4K]

The temperature of the shores

5 0

4 years ago

Who were “suitcase farmers” and how did they operate their farms?

jeka57 [31]

The farmers did not live on there land and they farmed and spent minimal time harvesting crops . The farming practice of the suitcase farmers where widely blamed for the dust bowl!

7 0

3 years ago

Which event occurred first 1.the mingols took over chinese rule

qwelly [4]

This is an incomplete question but I have read the original question and can answer this.

The following events happened in a chronological order.

1. Mongols took over Chinese rule

2. Tokugawa Shogunate began

3. The Koryu dynasty (aka Goryeo)

4.Buddhism was already introduces into Japan

I hope this helps!

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers