Answer:
A. It would allow the delegates to speak openly and honestly with each other
D. It would prevent the delegates from being pressured by the public
Explanation:
A. It would allow the delegates to speak openly and honestly with each other
[] With the secrecy rule, the delegates could speak openly since this would not reach the public. It helped to let them make decisions since there was less pressure from the public (ties into option D).
D. It would prevent the delegates from being pressured by the public
[] If the public didn't know what was going on, they could not pressure
The second and third options do not make sense because the delegates wanted everyone to attend (they also wanted the votes to be as unanimous as possible) and they were not planning specific military strategies at this time.
Have a nice day!
I hope this is what you are looking for, but if not - comment! I will edit and update my answer accordingly.
- Heather
Answer: The Tennis Court Oath – which was both a revolutionary act and an expression of popular sovereignty – had succeeded in forcing a royal back down. With one fell swoop, Louis XVI had abolished the Three Estates as separate political orders.
Explanation:
Almost all humans to a certain extent are dissatisfied with the limited availability of resources, but if you're speaking from an academic point of view, it would be Economists, since they study choices made from this limited availability.
The Canadian government turned them away.
It made the Himalayas my bro
