Answer: The answer is:
B in arguments about federal interference with southern states practing slavery.
Explanation: This a part of his ideas.
<em> "Our safety and prosperity depend on maintaining, in their full vigor, the restrictions imposed on the powers granted by the Constitution. So long as these are so maintained, and the powers confined to the objects intended by that sacred compact, we will be safe and prosperous,"</em>
For him, states’ rights theory was not a vindication of local democracy, but a safeguard for the distinct interests of the Southern slaveholding minority.
Option A. If a historian takes a source out of context, she is likely to:
A. misunderstand the intended meaning of historical actions.
<h3>What does it mean to take things out of context?</h3>
This is used to refer to the fact that a person is taking what is being said outside of the meaning that the message is supposed to convey. It has to do with not being able to understand what is said and interpreting it accordingly.
In this situation, when the historian takes things out of their context, then it means that they would not understand the true meaning of the happenings of that period.
Read more on historical events here: brainly.com/question/17040564
#SPJ1
The Georgia Fall Line resulted during prehistoric times when the ocean, which covered a large portion of what is nowadays Georgia receded and marked the boundary division between the coastal plains and the famous Piedmont region of the state. It is especially important because of the rivers that originated at the piedmont region and flowed into the coastal plains because at the coastal plains, these bodies of water were more navigable while in the piedmont region it was not possible. Because large boats could navigate through the coastal region rivers but not the piedmont ones, trading posts surged along the coastal plains but not the piedmont. From this development were born four of the most important cities of Georgia, which were also, throughout the state´s history, the capital.