Answer: China had decided not to modernize and industrialize
Explanation:
The Sino-Japanese War (the first one, carried out between 1894 and 1895), was a conflict between Japan and China for the supremacy over Korea (which for a long time was the most important client state for China). This war meant the rise of Japan as a great world power by showing the weakness of the Chinese empire (specifically the Qing dynasty).
The war was formally declared on August 1, 1894, with favorable predictions for China by foreign observers, because China had more people to fight. However, the Japanese surprised to be better equipped and prepared, after having successfully modernized.
That is why after more than six months of uninterrupted successes by Japanese land and naval forces and the loss of the Weihaiwei port by China, the Qing government sued for peace in February 1895.
<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be "power plants," since many of these plants exist on the coast line for cooling purposes. </span></span>
Answer:
Your answer would be C/H
Explanation:
The goal of prison reform was to improve the conditions of prison and enable criminals to be rehabilitated. During this time period, prisons were badly-run and many people dying via the death penalty.
Answer:
The three types of persuasive authority which judges may use in cases of first impression are higher, peers, or lower courts in the hierarchy, or from other jurisdictions.
Explanation:
A case of first impression is an issue where the parties disagree on what the applicable law is, and there is no prior binding authority, so that the matter has to be decided for the first time. A first impression case may be a first impression in only a particular jurisdiction.
By definition, a case of first impression cannot be decided by precedent. Since there is no precedent for the court to follow, the court uses the plain language and legislative history of any statute that must be interpreted, holdings of other jurisdictions, persuasive authority and analogies from prior rulings by other courts, commentaries and articles by legal scholars, and the court's own logic and sense of justice.
The answer is assembly and speech