<span>This was a declaration by the House of Commons of England reaffirming their right to freedom of speech in the face of King James' belief that they had no right to debate foreign policy. Many Members of Parliament were unhappy with James' foreign policy. They opposed the Spanish Match and wished for a war against Spain. The MPs believed that if they conceded that they had no right to debate matters which displeased the King, Parliament would be obsolete</span>
Cotton gins, battery, cars, radio
Answer:
Douglass states that Mr Covey gave him "very severe whipping, cutting my back..." This line is great evidence that supports the mean idea as it shows how slaves are treated worse than animals even. The rest of the passage provides various scenarios, all leading up to the main idea. Douglass states that he has "marks visible for a long time after." This further brings up the inexcusable actions that were done to the slaves. Animals may be treated badly from time to time but the slaves were constantly victims to lashings of anger.
Paragraph 2:
(I don't have the actual passage so i can't give evidence sorry, just put some quotes in alongside it)
The hypocrisy came from the people who slaved to the slaves. Religiously, not many people agreed on it , however, it still thrived due to the different variations in the religious beliefs. People that appeared 'religious' and that were wealthy could do anything with the slaves and no one would object because after all they were religious.
Explanation:
Puritans moved to the New World, and that's why it was founded.
-- CocoaBeanz got your back :)
