Answer:
Surrender of Lord Cornwallis by John Trumbull, depicts the British surrendering Benjamin Lincoln, flanked by French (left) and American troops. Oil on canvas, 1820.
Siege of Yorktown (1781)
Explanation:
Prospect to the South that slavery would not be confined to a limited section of the country and thus a limited political power. To the North, it offered a seemingly principled way out of the political crisis short of abolition or secession.
<span>Popular sovereignty had the opposite effect: it polarized political opinion even more. </span>
Popular sovereignty in practice touched off something very close to a civil war in Kansas as pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions organized their own state constitutional conventions and led to wave of bushwhacking and political murders. Both North and South were surprised at the lengths the other would go to.
<span>The Dred Scott decision then repudiated Congress's right to decide the question of slavery in the territories and asserted that slavery ownership was only a property right that Congress had no right to interfere with in the territories. </span>
The Dred Scott decision seemed to killed the notion of popular sovereignty but the Supreme Court's logic was obvious. It was only a matter of time before the Supreme Court handed down a ruling that Congress or the states had no right to restrict slavery anywhere, including free states.
To the South, popular sovereignty was suspect because it was championed by a Northerner and so must be some clever stratagem to limit and extinguish slavery.
To the North, in spite of 60 years of political compromise designed to limit the practice of slavery, it looked set to spread not only through the western territories but into free states as well and there would be no legislative means to prevent it, much of credit being due to Stephen Douglas.
<span>Abraham Lincoln hammered at popular sovereignty in the Lincoln - Douglas debates. </span>
C is the answer primarily because of the “be of good moral statute”.
Answer:
I'm pretty sure its B.
Explanation:
Kansas never became part of the confederacy. Kansas would've violated the Missouri compromise had they became part of the confederacy.
Civil rights and civil liberties are granted to the people as per the Constitution. They are well defined in the Constitution.
Civil rights are those that are granted by a government for the protection of its citizens in respect to guaranteeing fairness and checking discrimination. Civil liberties are the basic rights guaranteed to all citizens in a country without any further speciality.
Civil liberties include right to privacy, freedom of speech, freedom from slavery and forced labour, right to a fair trial, right to marry, right to vote, right to life, freedom from torture, right to liberty, freedom of conscience, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression.
‘Civil rights’ means an individual’s right to get equal treatment in cases of education, housing, employment, and a lot more. ‘Civil rights’ means free from discrimination or unfair treatment. Is that what you wanted?
<span>
</span>
