Answer: similarly to Lafayette or Mirabeau, Louis XVI believed in moderate way of doing this revolution. Neither Lafayette nor Mirabeau were republicans. Louis XVI was not republican. In contrast to Mirabeau or Lafayette Louis XVI was forced to call for General States (1789) because of problems with state budget (minister of finances Jacques Necker made him to make his made about it, there was no other way). Louis XVI was no republican
Explanation: Louis XVI has no free will already in 1789. He was also under the influence of much more radical right: 1) his wife Marie Antoinette (from Austrian dynasty of Habsburg), 2) his brothers : Louis de Provence, Charles d´Artois, 3) emigration (aristocracy that already during 1789, 1790 escaped to Rhineland, especially to Koblenz). When he tried to escape, he was caught with all his family in Varennes, and then executed (January 1793).
This is obviously 3, its like communism, communal control of wealth
One important factor that spurred population was the construction of the Railroads and the support of the government.
<h3>Why were railroads constructed in the US?</h3>
- The reason why they railroads were built in the United States were in order to open up the settlement in those areas of the country.
- They were built to cause accessibility in the rural parts of the country and to also to make transportation easier for both humans and also for goods.
Read more on the railroads here:
brainly.com/question/13870297?referrer=searchResults
Divisions over slavery in territory gained in the Mexican-American (1846-48). War was resolved in the Compromise of 1850. It consisted of laws admitting California as a free state, creating Utah and New Mexico territories with the question of slavery in each to be determined by popular sovereignty, settling a Texas-New Mexico boundary dispute in the former’s favor, ending the slave trade in Washington, D.C., and making it easier for southerners to recover fugitive slaves.
<span><span>Play videoSound Smart: Compromise of 18502min</span><span>Play videoWhat Was the Missouri Compromise?3min</span><span>Play videoSound Smart: The Kansas-Nebraska Act2min</span></span> <span>The compromise was the last major involvement in national affairs of Senators Henry Clay of Kentucky, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, all of whom had had exceptional careers in the Senate. Calhoun died the same year, and Clay and Webster two years later.<span>Did You Know?One of the legislative bills that were passed as part of the Compromise of 1850 was a new version of the Fugitive Slave Act.</span>At first, Clay introduced an omnibus bill covering these measures. Calhoun attacked the plan and demanded that the North cease its attempts to limit slavery. By backing Clay in a speech delivered on March 7, Webster antagonized his onetime abolitionist supporters. Senator William H. Seward of New York opposed to compromise and earned an undeserved reputation for radicalism by claiming that a “higher law” than the Constitution required the checking of slavery. President Zachary Taylor opposed the compromise, but his death on July 9 made procompromise vice president Millard Fillmore of New York president. Nevertheless, the Senate defeated the omnibus bill.Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois then split the omnibus proposal into individual bills so that congressmen could abstain or vote on each, depending on their interests. They all passed, and Fillmore signed them. The compromise enabled Congress to avoid sectional and slavery issues for several years.</span>
