The answer is that Zebulon Pike, the U.S. Army officer who in 1805 led an exploring party in search of the source of the Mississippi River, sets off with a new expedition to explore the American Southwest. Pike was instructed to seek out headwaters of the Arkansas and Red rivers and to investigate Spanish settlements in New Mexico. Pike and his men left Missouri and passed through the present day states of Kansas and Nebraska before reaching Colorado, where he spotted the famous mountains later named in his honor. From there, they traveled down to New Mexico, where they were stopped by Spanish officials and charged with illegal entry into Spanish- held territory. His party was escorted to Santa Fe, then down to Chihuahua, back up through Texas, and finally to the border of the Louisiana Territory, where they were released. Soon after returning to the east, Pike was implicated in a plot with former Vice President Aaron Burr to seize territory in the Southwest for mysterious ends. However, after an investigation, Secretary of State James Madison fully exonerated him. The information he provided about the U.S. territory in Kansas and Colorado was a great impetus for future U.S. settlement, and his reports about the weakness of Spanish authority in the Southwest stirred talk of the future U.S. annexation.
Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) was a Scottish economist. He was deeply critical of Christianity because of his own observation of hypocrisy within Protestantism.
In 1759, Smith published The Theory of Moral Sentiments, which established Smith’s reputation in his own days, is concerned with the explanation of moral approval and disapproval. He based his explanation on sympathy as a fundamental human motive.
In 1776, he published The Wealth of Nations that became the foundation of modern economics.
There has been considerable controversy as how far there is contradiction between Smith’s emphasis on sympathy in his <em>Theory of Moral Sentiments</em> and the key role of self- interest in <em>The Wealth of Nations</em>.
Smith’s idea of letting an economy without government intervention, called today Laissez faire was not about the government granting special economic privileges to powerful manufacturers and merchants. Mercantile monopolists and their allies in Parliament today, are the great enemies of Smith’s “free market mechanism”.
You were correct the answer is <em>United states </em>
hope this helps :)
Explanation:
After winning the 1936 presidential election in a landslide, Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed a bill to expand the membership of the Supreme Court. The law would have added one justice to the Court for each justice over the age of 70, with a maximum of six additional justices. Roosevelt’s motive was clear – to shape the ideological balance of the Court so that it would cease striking down his New Deal legislation. As a result, the plan was widely and vehemently criticized. The law was never enacted by Congress, and Roosevelt lost a great deal of political support for having proposed it. Shortly after the president made the plan public, however, the Court upheld several government regulations of the type it had formerly found unconstitutional. In National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, for example, the Court upheld the right of the federal government to regulate labor-management relations pursuant to the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. Many have attributed this and similar decisions to a politically motivated change of heart on the part of Justice Owen Roberts, often referred to as “the switch in time that saved nine.” Some legal scholars have rejected this narrative, however, asserting that Roberts' 1937 decisions were not motivated by Roosevelt's proposal and can instead be reconciled with his prior jurisprudence.
D. The Wright bros i hope this helps! and please mark as brainliest
