Answer:
Virginian lawmakers decided that slave status should be defined by their mothers because many slave children were born of Englishmen and thus the decision of acknowledging a black to be slave or free was dependent on his/her mother's condition.
And, the other laws passed by Virginian lawmakers was that the state of slavery of black children is not altered by participating in Christian sacrament of baptism, as it does not change their condition of slavery.
Explanation:
During 1660s, the Virginian lawmakers passed certain laws concerning slaves and blacks in the state. These laws were made basically to slander them.
In December 1662, the law passed concerning whether a child should be considered slave or free if the father is a free Englishmen.<u> On this matter, the law was passed stating that a child's status of being slave or free would be dependent upon the condition of mother's status.</u> The status of being free was overruled in case of birth from free Englishmen. The act also stated that if any Christian come upon any Negro man or woman shall be deemed to double fine.
In September 1667, another law was passed concerning condition of slavery if a child was made to participate in Christian sacrament of baptism. <u>The law stated that a child's status od being free or slave does not change even if he participated in baptism</u>. It stated that their condition remains the same regardless of generous owners who made their children, born of slavewoman, participate in baptism.
These laws suggests that they were passed solely to keep the slaves in their slavery condition and does not give them any right to attain freedom.
Colonial unity, an ongoing struggle, was necessary for preserving freedom. It was imperative that the colonies put aside their differences and unite even during the French and Indian War when they were allies with the British.
In 320 AD, Chandra Gupta I ascended to power, reuniting and strengthening northern India, while the Tamil kingdoms controlled the south. Option D is correct.
Chandragupta I was a king of the Gupta dynasty, who ruled in northern India. He was the first emperor of the dynasty.
The Gupta Empire was an ancient Indian empire lasting from the mid-to-late 3rd century CE to 543 CE.
C, because none of them make sense except that one
A. No it was adopted in 1876
B. Yes the constitution can be changed
C. The Texas constitution has a bill of rights and so does the U.S constitution
D. No why would it be called the TEXAS constitution?
