ANSWER-
I would think that it would be the last answer choice (little European contact had occurred in Australia)
Answer for the second
'Released from foreign war, we would probably be plunged into all the misery of anarchy and intestine war. Can we suppose that the people of the south, would submit to having the seat of Empire at Philadelphia, or New England; or that the people oppressed by a change of government, contrasting their misery with their former happy state, would not invite Britain to reassume the sovereignty.” — James Chalmers, Plain Truth, 1776
If the one above is the argument, you might consider that the colonists did obtain independence from England. That by itself was something that Chalmers always thought to be impossible without serious repercussions. He used to say that in the case of achieving freedom, America would just end up being attacked and maybe even colonized by some other country. What happened, thought, was that after the revolution, other countries gained respect for America as an opponent and the country was eventually left to be.
Did you ever get the answer? I'm doing the part 2
The Social Gospel Movement originated during the second half of the 19th century. Its main ideas that good actions led to salvation, as people must emulate the life of Jesus Christ in their day to the activities. American Theoolgist Walter Rauschenbusch was one of the main representatives of this movement.
On the other hand, the progressive movement proposed the idea that of improving society by implementing reforms in education, safety and health that would lead to people's overall well-being, as this was seen as the ultimate goal of progressivism.
The difference between the two movements resides in the fact that the Social Gospel Movement encouraged good acts in the name of Christ, while Progressivism encouraged good efforts for the good of mankind, regardless of any belief.
