Answer:
Read Below
Explanation:
Question: The U.S Constitution required that the treaty be ratified by the U.S Senate under the Cherokee Constitution treaties had to be approved by the Cherokee national council. Did this occur with the treaty of 1835?
Answer: Negotiated in 1835 by a minority party of Cherokees, challenged by the majority of the Cherokee people and their elected government, the Treaty of New Echota was used by the United States to justify the forced removal of the Cherokees from their homelands along what became known as the Trail of Tears. In 1819 the remaining Cherokees who opposed removal negotiated still another treaty. So, yes it did occur in 1835.
Do you think U.S government has the right to enforce this treaty?
Another 130 years would pass before another president of the United States personally delivered a treaty to the Senate. On July 10, 1919, President Woodrow Wilson asked for a quick consent to the Treaty of Versailles. The Senate approved the treaty for ratification on October 20, 1803.
Hopes this Helps :D
Mark me as Brainiest Please : )
Hello there,
when can a police officer arrest a suspect in Florida
Answer: When a crime is committed
By not misusing the information regarding the feeling,needs and behavior of participants.The researcher can control harmful behavior.
<u>Explanation:</u>
Psychological research is undertaken to study human behavior. It helps us to measure and classify human behavior. Such research identifies what is normal behavior. If the behavior is abnormal than that can be known through this kind of research.
In Psychological research, it is of the utmost importance to respect the dignity of others. This will prevent any kind of harmful behavior. For example, the researchers must not manipulate the participants. If a researcher has information regarding the feelings and emotions of participants then they must not misuse it.
Bolivar stood apart from his class in ideas, values and vision. Who else would be found in the midst of a campaign swinging in a hammock, reading the French philosophers? His liberal education, wide reading, and travels in Europe had broadened his horizons and opened his mind to the political thinkers of France and Britain. He read deeply in the works of Hobbes and Spinoza, Holbach and Hume; and the thought of Montesquieu and Rousseau left its imprint firmly on him and gave him a life-long devotion to reason, freedom and progress. But he was not a slave of the Enlightenment. British political virtues also attracted him. In his Angostura Address (1819) he recommended the British constitution as 'the most worthy to serve as a model for those who desire to enjoy the rights of man and all political happiness compatible with our fragile nature'. But he also affirmed his conviction that American constitutions must conform to American traditions, beliefs and conditions.
His basic aim was liberty, which he described as "the only object worth the sacrifice of man's life'. For Bolivar liberty did not simply mean freedom from the absolutist state of the eighteenth century, as it did for the Enlightenment, but freedom from a colonial power, to be followed by true independence under a liberal constitution. And with liberty he wanted equality – that is, legal equality – for all men, whatever their class, creed or colour. In principle he was a democrat and he believed that governments should be responsible to the people. 'Only the majority is sovereign', he wrote; 'he who takes the place of the people is a tyrant and his power is usurpation'. But Bolivar was not so idealistic as to imagine that South America was ready for pure democracy, or that the law could annul the inequalities imposed by nature and society. He spent his whole political life developing and modifying his principles, seeking the elusive mean between democracy and authority. In Bolivar the realist and idealist dwelt in uneasy rivalry.
Limits are the outer boundaries of a group in regard to behaviors that will be accepted within the group.
