Baron von Steuben trained the Continental Army at Valley Forge. He taught the soldiers how to march, use a bayonet, and how to quickly and efficiently execute orders, and his training was the reason why the Americans won over the British in Monmouth.
Rousseau meant by the general will that there is an inner aim in all human beings to a form existence which is common to all of them.
Explanation:
Rousseau was a primitive theorist in the sense that he believed that humans could have a peaceful coexistence if they went back to their old primate lifestyles and left the root of all evils behind with the society.
In this age of innocence, he believed there can not be any evil in any person who lives in this primate world.
This was part of his concept of the general will that all the people in the world possess this will to go back to that primitive life and lead a life of innocence.
Answer:
The decision in Scott v. Sandford was received with joy and relief in the south, because much of the region's society owned slaves; while in the north it caused much disgust and annoyance among abolitionists.
Explanation:
Dred Scott was born in slavery around 1799 in Virginia. He moved with his master, Peter Blow, to Missouri in 1830. After Blow died two years later, military surgeon John Emerson Scott bought and brought him to Illinois and then to a town in Wisconsin, places where slaves were prohibited by law.
After Emersons death, Scott tried to buy his freedom and his family's from Emerson's widow, Irene, but she did not accept his offer. Scott, therefore, in 1850, decided to go to trial and demand his liberty in view of the fact that he had lived for eight years in counties where slavery was illegal and received no legal recognition. Henry Taylor Blow, son of Peters Blow and Scott's childhood friend, funded the couple's lawsuit and provided legal advice to them in litigation. After three appeals, the lawsuit was submitted to the Supreme Court in 1857.
On March 6, the Supreme Court ruled against Scott by seven votes against two. The court's finding was that neither Scott nor other African Americans were considered citizens, and therefore Scott was not entitled to litigate for US law. Furthermore, the Supreme Court denied that Scott had been freed by living in Missouri because the Constitution required the government not to deprive anyone of its legal property without litigation. Thus, in fact, all laws that prohibited or restricted slavery in the United States were contrary to the Constitution.
