During the period of the Renaissance, Italy was divided into numerous small city-states controlled by local wealthy people. There were large differences though from one city-state to another, and while the northern ones were very wealthy and had things going very smoothly, the southern ones were much less successful.
The reason why the northern Italian city-states were so wealthy was mostly the trade. These city-states had excellent large ports. They were producing multiple things that were in high demand and also very well paid for for export, and were getting lot of things they needed and desired from the other parts of the world.
These states had very well developed fleets, and they were trading with multiple Asian regions, Europe, as well as parts of Africa. They were exporting their high quality products. Very often they were buying certain things from one place, then re-sell it in other place buy much higher prices, thus getting more and more wealth over time. That wealth enabled them to get all they needed without any problem, thus making them very stable and strong small states.
Andrew Jackson started the "Bank War" over the rechartering of the Second Bank of the United States. Proponents of the bank said that it encouraged westward expansion, expanded international commerce using credit, and helped reduce the government's debt. Jackson, on the other hand, was heavily against the BUS, calling it a danger to the liberties of the people. A champion for the rights of the common man, he advocated to protect the farmers and laborers. He claimed that the bank was owned by a small group of upperclass men, who only became richer by pocketing the money paid by the poorer common man for loans.
Jackson argued against the constitutionality of the BUS that was upheld about fourteen years before, during the 1819 McCulloch v. Maryland case. One of the points of the unanimous decision in that case stated that Congress had the power to establish the bank. Jackson, however, said that McCulloch v. Maryland could not prevent him from declaring a presidential veto on the bank if he believed it unconstitutional. He said that the decision in that 1819 case “ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution," meaning that the 1819 decision could not control his interpretation of the Constitution or prevent him from doing what he thought was right. This point of view earned him the nickname "King Andrew I" from his critics, who saw his use of the veto and his attempted intrusion on congressional power as power-hungry behavior. In the end, Jackson was successful in challenging the bank, as its charter expired in 1836. He had successfully killed the "monster" that was the Bank of the United States.
Idk gyifidhdsfbydewuhdefcihewf gfygfgyue
Answer: b. James A. Garfield.
Explanation: From to 1851 to 1854 he studied at the Western Reserve Eclectic Institute [later named Hiram College] in Hiram, Ohio. He then moved to Williams University in Williamstown, Massachusetts, where he was a member of the Delta Epsilon brotherhood. He graduated in 1856 as an exceptional student who excelled in all subjects except chemistry. He later taught classical languages at the Eclectic Institute during the academic year 1856-1857 and was appointed director of the institute from 1857 until 1860. Garfield decided that academic life was not for him and he studied law on his own. He was admitted to the Ohio Bar in 1860. As an anecdote, it should be noted that he was an amateur mathematician and published an original proof of the Pythagorean Theorem [New England Journal of Education]
Answer:
The Decleration Of Independance
Explanation: