Historian Frederick Merk says this concept was born out of "a sense of mission to redeem the Old World by high example ... generated by the potentialities of a new earth for building a new heaven".[4]
Historians have emphasized that "manifest destiny" was a contested concept—pre-civil war Democrats endorsed the idea but many prominent Americans (such as Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and most Whigs) rejected it. Historian Daniel Walker Howe writes, "American imperialism did not represent an American consensus; it provoked bitter dissent within the national polity ... Whigs saw America's moral mission as one of democratic example rather than one of conquest."[5]
Newspaper editor John O'Sullivan is generally credited with coining the term manifest destiny in 1845 to describe the essence of this mindset, which was a rhetorical tone;[6] however, the unsigned editorial titled "Annexation" in which it first appeared was arguably written by journalist and annexation advocate Jane Cazneau.[7] The term was used by Democrats in the 1840s to justify the war with Mexico and it was also used to divide half of Oregon with the United Kingdom. But manifest destiny always limped along because of its internal limitations and the issue of slavery, says Merk. It never became a national priority. By 1843 John Quincy Adams, originally a major supporter of the concept underlying manifest destiny, had changed his mind and repudiated expansionism because it meant the expansion of slavery in Texas.
Answer:
Second Option
Explanation:
In the Eight U.S Amendment, Cruel and Unusual Punishments cannot be inflicted
here you go
1). emancipation proclomation
2). reconstruction
3).
It created a too-weak national government.
When Congress drafted the nation's first constitution in 1777, it knew that many Americans feared a powerful national government. For that reason, the proposed Articles of Confederation created a framework for a loose confederation of states. Within this alliance, each state would retain "sovereignty, freedom, and independence." Any power not specifically given to Congress was reserved for the states. This meant that each state could often develop its own policies.
In addition, the Articles did not set up an executive branch to carry out the laws or a judicial branch to settle legal questions.
