1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
olchik [2.2K]
3 years ago
12

Analyze the similarities and differences between John Calvin and Martin

History
1 answer:
dmitriy555 [2]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

First of you should say can you please help me not do this do that the answer i dunno but i can help.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Read It!
babunello [35]
The answer it D painful
5 0
2 years ago
Which of the following statements is NOT true?
GREYUIT [131]
I believe the answer here is C

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Write two paragraphs describing the different points of view in the following scenarios:
solmaris [256]

Answer:No secession ball will mark the day. Nor, it appears, are any other commemorative events planned by Texas, which would rather boast of its time as an independent country. But 150 years ago today, shortly after 11 a.m. on Feb. 1, 1861, a state convention voted overwhelmingly to secede from the Union.

In Austin, on the second floor of the old Texas statehouse just south of the current Capitol building (near the present-day Alamo and Texas Rangers monuments), cheering delegates to the special convention approved a short document declaring that the federal government was becoming "a weapon with which to strike down the interests and prosperity of the people of Texas and her Sister slaveholding States." Texas, they stated, was henceforth a "separate Sovereign state ... absolved from all allegiance to the United States." (An even more explicit "declaration of causes" followed a day later; it's well worth a read.)

For one aging veteran in the hall, this was the blackest of days. Sam Houston, the 67-year-old governor of Texas (who had twice served as president of the Republic of Texas), had for years almost single-handedly kept secessionist sentiment in the state at bay, despite being a slaveholder himself. Nearly three decades earlier, Houston had fought for Texan independence from Mexico and guided the fledgling Republic into the Union. He did not want to lose his life's work. "Mark me, the day that produces a dissolution of this [Union] will be written in the blood of humanity," Houston, then a U.S. senator, told Congress in 1854 as he defied Southern predilections to vote against the Kansas-Nebraska Act.

Of himself, he had said: "I wish no prouder epitaph to mark the board or slab that may lie on my tomb than this: 'He loved his country, he was a patriot; he was devoted to the Union.'"

As secessionist fever swept Texas, Houston was denounced as a "traitor-knave" for his Unionist views. Always, though, when the grand old man — who still hobbled from a wound sustained at San Jacinto in 1836 — took the stage, he had been able to quell his rivals. But as the year 1860 drew to a close, with Abraham Lincoln's election causing South Carolina to secede and other states to teeter on the brink, Houston, despite being governor, could no longer hold back the tide.

He tried. When secessionists began clamoring for a special legislative session in anticipation of secession, Houston stalled. Soon, however, a secession convention at the end of January 1861 appeared inevitable. Houston convened a special session of the Legislature just before the convention, hoping that he could somehow persuade lawmakers to rein in the proceedings.

It was not to be. The delegates — chosen in a hastily organized election in early January — convened in Austin on Jan. 28, 1861, and quickly penned a document that would sever Texas' ties to the federal government. Houston was invited to the roll call on Feb. 1. He sat "grim and motionless," writes his biographer M.K. Wisehart. One man called him a traitor to his face, though Houston's allies swiftly demanded (and received) an apology. The delegates approved the secession ordinance, 166-8.

The governor won a few concessions, however. He had said he would swallow secession if the people ratified it — so it was put to a vote on Feb. 23, 1861, and the people affirmed it, 44,317 to 13,020. Houston tried to argue that Texas voters had merely approved secession, rather than latching onto the Confederacy. This was technically true, but the governor, who preferred that Texas should return to its old status as an independent country, had lost his sway. In March, Texas became the last state to join the Confederacy in the "first wave," before hostilities broke out at Fort Sumter.

A defiant Houston would swear no oath to the Confederacy, and he was finished as governor. "Fellow citizens, in the name of your rights and liberties, which I believe have been trampled upon, I refuse to take this oath," he declared on March 16, 1861. "In the name of the nationality of Texas, I refuse to take this oath. …" Nor would he live to see the end of the war he tried so hard to avert; he died in 1863, a year after the Battle of Shiloh, in which his son, Sam Jr., a Confederate soldier, was wounded and held prisoner for months. Texas, in fact, would become the site of the last battle of the Civil War, in May 1865. It was also the last rebel state readmitted to the Union, on March 30, 1870, subject to several conditions.

There is another peculiar post-script to the secessionist drama of 1861.

Oddly enough, one Robert E. Lee was living in Texas at that time. Lee had been stationed in Texas on and off for several years, commanding the Second United States Cavalry in frontier skirmishes against Comanches and Mexicans. He didn't seem too fond of the frontier life; he wrote to his wife of living of a "desert of dullness."

8 0
3 years ago
please put each step inn the right order. electors are chosen. citizens vote. electors vote. electors choose the president.
Marina CMI [18]
This is the right order
4 0
3 years ago
Cómo conseguirían su trabajo los miembros de la cámara baja?
aev [14]

Answer:

Para ser miembro de la cámara baja de un país, por ejemplo, de la cámara de los comunes en el Reino Unido, o de la cámara de representantes en Estados Unidos, éstos deben ganar una elección con el fin de ser elegidos como representantes de un segmento de la población, un segmento que es menos numero que el que es representado por un miembro de una cámara alta, por ejemplo un senador.

Los miembros de las cámaras bajas suelen tener un carácter más local, menos aristocrático, y más popular que los miembros de las cámaras altas. Ésto debido a que en su origen las cámaras bajas fueron desarrolladas con el fin de balancear el poder de las cámaras altas, las cuales estaban dominadas por la aristocracia, el clero, y los poderes económicos.

8 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why do historians use tools such as maps, timelines, and technology to help them conduct their work?
    11·2 answers
  • Activity Examine the population pyramid of Kenya and answer the questions. a graph showing the male and female population of Ken
    13·2 answers
  • Which of the following countries were part of French Indochina? Check all that apply.
    5·2 answers
  • Which is the BEST description of the difference between a republic and a direct democracy? A) There is no difference between the
    6·2 answers
  • What motivates leaders in cuba, china, and north korea to prevent their citizens from freely accessing the internet?
    10·2 answers
  • What are a few of the positive things the Equal Rights Amendment would have done for women in America?
    15·1 answer
  • What port city was captured by Admiral David Farragut?
    12·2 answers
  • Any body help me with my history homework I will appreciate it Plz​
    14·1 answer
  • Which of the following is true of slavery in the U.S. before the Civil War?
    11·2 answers
  • English names for meat have their origins from what country?
    13·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!