Answer:
In many ways, the U.S. and Texas Constitutions are similar documents. They both embody the principles of representative democratic government, in which sovereignty emanates from the people. Both contain a bill of rights that protects civil liberties from government infringement
Explanation:
Answer:
Black and white abolitionists in the first half of the nineteenth century waged a biracial assault against slavery. Their efforts proved to be extremely effective. Abolitionists focused attention on slavery and made it difficult to ignore. They heightened the rift that had threatened to destroy the unity of the nation even as early as the Constitutional Convention.
Although some Quakers were slaveholders, members of that religious group were among the earliest to protest the African slave trade, the perpetual bondage of its captives, and the practice of separating enslaved family members by sale to different masters.
As the nineteenth century progressed, many abolitionists united to form numerous antislavery societies. These groups sent petitions with thousands of signatures to Congress, held abolition meetings and conferences, boycotted products made with slave labor, printed mountains of literature, and gave innumerable speeches for their cause. Individual abolitionists sometimes advocated violent means for bringing slavery to an end.
Although black and white abolitionists often worked together, by the 1840s they differed in philosophy and method. While many white abolitionists focused only on slavery, black Americans tended to couple anti-slavery activities with demands for racial equality and justice.
Explanation:
Answer:
A Silver Dollar.
Explanation:
Though, I'm pretty sure it's not true, that is the legend...
<em> A.) Improving Roman infrastructures.</em>
<em>When they were moving to another location Roman soldiers did not have to improve on other Roman infrastructures they came upon along the way, because the building of the infrastructures was not organized by the Roman troops, more so they were organized by an architect and the architect's workers.</em>
<em>The reason I also chose A was because the Roman troops traveled in their groups and whenever they were injured it was up to them to man the camp hospitals to heal the wounded. Also recruiting more soldiers along the way was also very helpful to the Roman legion and allowed a much broader amount of soldiers that could be used for taking over land. Not to mention that soldiers (traveling strictly inside their troops) were responsible for feeding themselves (what I'm saying is that the troops were responsible for cooking and feeding each other I just used "themselves" as the word to describe it).</em>
<em>Since Roman soldiers traveled in groups they did not (I'm assuming here I don't know for sure) take women or other people along with them and they only took the amount of soldiers that were assigned by their higher ups. In other words Roman soldiers were really only expected to do as they were ordered to (in modern times any disobedience to what they were ordered to do would have resulted in them having it put on a disaplinary record, but they did not do that sort of thing during Roman times meaning that they punished the soldiers in ways that I don't factually now about). Basically the key importance in the Roman soldier was to carry out the order he received and complete the order quickly and efficiently. However, they did recruit soldiers along the way as they were instructed and that was to help them benefit for taking over land. The commanding officer was the one who told the Roman soldiers what to do when they were traveling (simple tasks, not the task assigned by the current ruler) and the soldiers were expected to complete it. A few of the tasks assigned by the commanding officer could have been to cook, preform healing measures, and recruit more soldiers.</em>
<em>Hope this helps.</em>
<em>-Northstar</em>
"Numerous Indian citizens are hurt when an office building is attacked by the British" would most likely cause an increase in Indian nationalism.
This is further explained below.
<h3>What is
nationalism?</h3>
Generally, It is a political philosophy that stresses the importance of loyalty, devotion, or allegiance to a country or nation-state and maintains that such duties are more important than other individual or group interests.
In conclusion, Increased Indian nationalism would be probable if the British assaulted an office building and injured many Indian nationals.
Read more about Indian nationalism
brainly.com/question/15319440
#SPJ1
