To protect individual rights, the Anti-Federalists wanted to add a bill of rights to the Constitution.
While Federalists supported the Constitution,<u> Anti-Federalists were against the ratification of the Constitution since they believed that this document gave too much power to the central government</u>, which posed a risk to the individual liberty. In order to protect the individual rights, Anti-Federalists wanted to add a Bill of Rights to the Constitution, even though Federalists did not think that this was necessary. However, <u>the Bill of Rights, which was inspired by the Virginia Declaration of Rights, was finally approved in Congress in 1789</u>.
Answer:
The answer is pretty straight forward.
There are several types of accounts such as,
Savings accounts: these accounts are used to save money and have a low interest rate. can deposit and withdraw money any time.
Fixed Deposits: these deposits provide a higher interest rate yet the deposit has to remain a fixed period of time and cannot withdraw or deposit as you wish.
Current accounts: The type of accounts allows the users to do transactions in cheques and allows bank overdrafts as well. However, they don't provide an interest income.
Apart from this main 3 types, there are many other variations of these accounts that have similarities to these accounts. following is a list of them,
- Checking Accounts
- Dividend/Interest Checking Accounts
- A Money Market Account
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Constitution of the United States was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and therefore the rights and privileges it confers upon American citizens could not apply to them. The decision was made in the case of Dred Scott, an enslaved black man whose owners had taken him from Missouri, which was a slave-holding state, into the Missouri Territory, most of which had been designated "free" territory by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. When his owners later brought him back to Missouri, Scott sued in court for his freedom, claiming that because he had been taken into "free" U.S. territory, he had automatically been freed, and was legally no longer a slave. Scott sued first in Missouri state court, which ruled that he was still a slave under its law. He then sued in U.S. federal court, which ruled against him by deciding that it had to apply Missouri law to the case. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Answer:
B) A woman talking to a group of eager listeners.
Explanation:
The stuttering and pauses indicates that she felt rushed, due to the "eagerness" of the listeners. "(she looks around the circle of faces)" lets the reader know that she was talking to a group of people. She speaks in first person, therefore the account was her own experience.
Hope this helps! :)
