Answer:
the Oregon Treaty
Explanation:
The Oregon Treaty set the U.S. and British North American border at the 49th parallel with the exception of Vancouver Island, which was retained in its entirety by the British.
Answer: Hitler was a known hater of Jews. He used the economical state of Germany to turn Germans against the Jews.
Explanation:Present in Europe long before the advent of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, anti-Jewish prejudice was a complex phenomenon that stretched across the continent and existed among all the peoples of Europe. The Jews were a people apart, not only by virtue of the fact that they maintained separate religious beliefs but because of distinct cultural practices as well. Klaus Fischer, a German historian of the roots of Nazism, has stressed that the Jews were "an ancient cultured people" who practiced a reverence for learning and philosophical thinking centuries before the existence of the early Greek city-states or the Roman republic. When Jews entered into Europe in large numbers during the Middle Ages, "they found themselves living among primitive Western people who were repelled by their superior intelligence and their clever business acumen. There was mutual contempt and hate . . . the two peoples were living geographically alongside each other, but they were immersed in different cultural stages." If Fischer is correct, then the Europeans' responses toward the Jews involved religious differences, cultural differences, the suspicion of one group of people toward 'outsiders,' and not a little envy. It was a volatile mixture that readily could be fanned into violence.
All of these responses and motives can be discerned in the remarks below, made by Germans about the Jews, from the 1500s to the advent of Hitler's Nazi movement. Hitler thus could draw upon a long tradition of anti-Semitism in making the Jews his special scapegoats for Germany's troubles.
In the area of economics and big business, the three things that President Wilson accomplished are lowering tariffs for more competition, signing the Clayton Antitrust Act and passed the Federal Trade Act. Hope this answers the question. Have a nice day.
Chief Justice John Marshall stated last 1803 in the case of Marbury v. Madison that "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each."
It implies that the judicial department applies the law and the understanding and interpretation therein would still be based on the designated person. If soever, the interpreter or representative in the judicial department would make any conflict with the intent, process, actual application of the law (the two representation of law), the courts would be the end to finalize the decision.
