Answer:
Explanation:
Hamilton, although he had expressed substantially the same view in The Federalist regarding the power of reception, adopted a very different conception of it in defense of Washington’s proclamation. Writing under the pseudonym, “Pacificus,” he said: “The right of the executive to receive ambassadors and other public ministers, may serve to illustrate the relative duties of the executive and legislative departments. This right includes that of judging, in the case of a revolution of government in a foreign country, whether the new rulers are competent organs of the national will, and ought to be recognized, or not; which, where a treaty antecedently exists between the United States and such nation, involves the power of continuing or suspending its operation. For until the new government is acknowledged, the treaties between the nations, so far at least as regards public rights, are of course suspended. This power of determining virtually upon the operation of national treaties, as a consequence of the power to receive public ministers, is an important instance of the right of the executive, to decide upon the obligations of the country with regard to foreign nations. To apply it to the case of France, if there had been a treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive, between the United States and that country, the unqualified acknowledgment of the new government would have put the United States in a condition to become as an associate in the war with France, and would have laid the legislature under an obligation, if required, and there was otherwise no valid excuse, of exercising its power of declaring war. This serves as an example of the right of the executive, in certain cases, to determine the condition of the nation, though it may, in its consequences, affect the exercise of the power of the legislature to declare war. Nevertheless, the executive cannot thereby control the exercise of that power. The legislature is still free to perform its duties, according to its own sense of them; though the executive, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, may establish an antecedent state of things, which ought to weigh in the legislative decision. The division of the executive power in the Constitution, creates a concurrent authority in the cases to which it relates.
Maggie is shy and doesn't have much confidence at this point of the story.
Answer:
I once had a border collie. She was so smart. Every morning, I'd open up the front door and she'd run out, pick up the newspaper, and deliver it to my husband at the breakfast table.
Oh, I love Ireland! I visited the west coast six times last year. Have you ever been to Kilmacduagh? It's an old monastery where the winds whip with songs of the deceased who are laid to rest there.
Is that a white rose? Wow! I love them. My grandfather had a massive rose garden, over 200 different species. Every Friday, he'd go out into the garden, clip a dozen, and make my grandmother a bouquet. Does love like that exist anymore?
Explanation:
Even though you didn't give us the fragment with the comma slice, it isn't really necessary here as we can answer just based on these 4 options here. All options apart from the second one are correct - only the second option doesn't fix the mistake of the comma splice, whereas the other options do but connecting the sentences properly.
Hi there!
The statement that best describes the satire in the excerpt from The Canterbury Tales is that Chaucer criticizes the idea that forgiveness is available for purchase.
In pieces of literature, performing arts or dances, satire is a genre that is used to ridicule or shame someone through wittiness and in form of humour. Satire is usually meant to be humorous.
This can be seen in the excerpt with: “All for a penny! Out now with your purse!” <em>Chaucer expresses humorously what he thinks about churches. </em>
Hope this helps!
