Through much of the nineteenth century, Great Britain avoided the kind of social upheaval that intermittently plagued the Continent between 1815 and 1870. Supporters of Britain claimed that this success derived from a tradition of vibrant parliamentary democracy. While this claim holds some truth, the Great Reform Bill of 1832, the landmark legislation that began extending the franchise to more Englishmen, still left the vote to only twenty percent of the male population. A second reform bill passed in 1867 vertically expanded voting rights, but power remained in the hands of a minority--property-owning elites with a common background, a common education, and an essentially common outlook on domestic and foreign policy. The pace of reform in England outdistanced that of the rest of Europe, but for all that remained slow. Though the Liberals and Conservatives did advance different philosophy on the economy and government in its most basic sense, the common brotherhood on all representatives in parliament assured a relatively stable policy-making history.
Sorry it's so long but that's the answer toy your question...Hope this helps:)
Answer:
Explanation:
mixed with 3 basic scripts
1)Kanji
2)Hiragana
3)Katakana
here are some examples!
Please mark me brainiest! have a great day
Answer:
................Wilbur and Orville Wright............
People could not buy food or trade goods any more.
The King might have ignored the colonists petitions for redress because he believed he was well within his authority to impose the imperial policies that the British were imposing on the colonists. Additionally the British believed that they had protected and taken care of the colonists in a number of wars and therefore deserved to be paid through taxes for the services they had provided. In addition the King had numerous other colonies and wanted to prevent any of the colonies from believing they had the ability or right for self government.
