<span>confidence placed in a person by making that person the nominal owner of property to be held or used for the benefit of one or more others.
So I would go with B</span>
Local regulations that governed slave life and ownership were described in slave codes. ( Option 4 )
<u>- More about slave codes : </u>
- Slave laws, notably those governing the Atlantic slave trade and chattel slavery in the Americas, were known as slave codes. The bulk of slave laws concentrated on the duties and rights of free people toward those who were enslaved.
- Slaves were forbidden from owning weapons or using them to defend themselves. They were not permitted to serve on juries or testify in court against a white person. No formal agreement, even marriage, could they make.
To know more about slave codes, kindly click on the link below :
brainly.com/question/17945915?referrer=searchResults
#SPJ4
To make it more reasonable is the answer to this question
Numerous originalists would reply "yes," on the grounds that legal audit isn't listed as an energy of the Judicial Branch in the Constitution.
Then again, the legal audit was at that point a setup training when the Constitution was composed, and the Framers, a significant number of whom were attorneys with information of court method, didn't expressly disallow it. Article III makes no say of how the Judicial Branch should practice statute. The absence of direction has a tendency to infer the Framers deliberately permitted adaptability and a level of independence in deciding the courts' operation. In the event that they had no aim for the Judicial Branch to go about as a mind the energy of the other two branches, they could have set more unequivocal rules for the legal to take after.
