1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Igoryamba
3 years ago
8

Which of the following issues is Commissioner Lin addressing in his letter?

History
1 answer:
nexus9112 [7]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

Illegal British sales of opium in China

Explanation:

During this time, opium was being smuggled into the country in order to intentionally hurt the natives.

You might be interested in
If the goverment is completely destroyed what will happen to us the people as a result?
butalik [34]
Hypothetically, if the <span>government is completely destroyed, then the people will descend into "anarchy" since it has been proven that people need to have some type of government order in which to thrive. </span>
8 0
4 years ago
According to the passage, why did the Byzantines want Belisarius to stake everything in a single battle against the Goths?
ratelena [41]
<span>According to the passage included in this question, the reason that the Byzantines wanted Bilisarius to stake everything in a single battle against the Goths was that they had hope this would prevent them from starving to death. This is evidenced by the reference to them having 'no more grain'.</span>
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How do opportunity costs shape economic<br> decisions?
Anna71 [15]
It is important because it creates opportunities and variations in the economy
5 0
3 years ago
How did the Han Dynasty provide those who traded along The Silk Road protection?
maksim [4K]
The Silk Road had many raiders who took everything they were trading which basically ruined the whole point of trading anything.

To prevent this, the Han Dynasty realized they needed to protect the traders from being robbed. 

They extended the Great Wall of China to protect the trade route :)
5 0
3 years ago
Understanding the Case
S_A_V [24]

Answer:

Marbury: Was appointed as a federal judge - Supported the Judiciary Act of 1789 - Argued for original jurisdiction.

-Madison: Refused to honor an appointment.Explanation:

Marbury v. Madison was a judicial case resolved by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1803. It arose as a result of a political dispute following the presidential elections of 1800, in which Thomas Jefferson, who was a Democratic Republican, defeated then-President John Adams, who was a federalist. In the last days of the outgoing government of Adams, the Congress, dominated by the federalists, established a series of judicial positions, among them 42 justices the of peace for the District of Columbia. The Senate confirmed the appointments, the president signed them and the Secretary of State was in charge of sealing and delivering the appointment documents. In the last-minute hustle and bustle, the outgoing secretary of state did not deliver the minutes of appointment to four justices of the peace, including William Marbury.

The new secretary of state under President Jefferson, James Madison, refused to deliver the minutes of appointment as the new government was irritated by the maneuver of the federalists of trying to secure control of the judiciary with the appointment of members of their party just before ceasing in government. However, Marbury appealed to the Supreme Court to order Madison to deliver his record.

If the Court ruled in favor of Marbury, Madison could still refuse to deliver the record and the Supreme Court would have no way to enforce the order. If the Court ruled against Marbury, it risked submitting the judiciary to Jefferson's supporters by allowing them to deny Marbury the position he could legally claim. Chief Justice John Marshall resolved this dilemma by deciding that the Supreme Court was not empowered to settle this case. Marshall ruled that Section 13 of the Judiciary Act, which granted the Court these powers, was unconstitutional because it extended the original jurisdiction of the Court to the jurisdiction defined by the Constitution itself. Having decided not to intervene in this particular case, the Supreme Court secured its position as final arbiter of the law.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • 8. How did the Roman empire support its expansion and integrate culture on three continents?
    6·1 answer
  • What popular sovereignty means in your own words
    7·1 answer
  • Which american political ideas derived from an english political heritage?
    14·1 answer
  • With which country did Otto von Bismarck purposely start a war in 1866 to gain control of German speaking states?
    11·1 answer
  • Who was the English sea dog who plundered the Spanish way
    8·1 answer
  • All of the following statements are true except for A. The mountain region is located in East Texas. B. Drought occurs regularly
    15·2 answers
  • What took place during the fourteenth century (1300s)?
    5·1 answer
  • President george Washington set a percedent for all future presidents by
    15·1 answer
  • Why did the sight of
    12·1 answer
  • 1. Using Source 3, which statement best describes an advantage for Jackson's forces during the Battle of New Orleans?"
    7·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!