I'm not sure if any were begun in 1775. The American Revolution was occurring at the time but it started in 1760's the sugar and stamp acts were in 1764 and 1765, While the Townsend act was in 1770. The declaration wasn't even started until 1817.
Answer:
The rights of citizens would be better protected by having both federal and state levels of government.
Hope this helps!
Before the Civil War, the Free-Soil movement and the Republican Party embraced this idea for the American West: a territory reserved for small white farmers, unchallenged by the wealthy plantation owners who could buy up vast tracts of land and employ slave labor.
Answer:
Option: Rights that were not listed would be unprotected.
Explanation:
The Bill of Rights introduced to protect the citizens of America by the Congress in 1791 as they approved and ensuring rights which include the freedoms of religion, speech, press, and assembly with restricting the power of the government. For the first time, James Madison proposed the U.S. Bill of Rights because he thought that not listed rights will remain unprotected and misused by the government in future.
I'm a fan of historian Michael Wood! One of my favorite items from him was the BBC documentary series, "In the Footsteps of Alexander the Great."
The quote you mention from Wood comes from his historical researches regarding India. (You could also look for his BBC documentary series, "The Story of India.") The "rejection of a whole way of understanding history" was the way that Wood described the actions of Asoka (or Ashoka -- you'll see both spellings). Asoka was ruler from 268 to 232 BC of lands that would later become known as India. Asoka was a great conqueror but also someone who found enlightenment through Buddhism. After conquering the Kalinga region in eastern India, rather than feeling some great rush of pride or accomplishment because of their victory, Asoka felt guilty. So he worked hard to improve the lives of the Kalinga people that he had conquered. This was what Wood was referring to when he said Asoka's attitude/approach "was a rejection of a whole way of understanding history." Conquest was not something to be celebrated triumphantly. Rather, the conquerors had an obligation to those whom they had conquered.
