Answer:
To pro-slavery factions, liberty and republicanism were to a limited extent, that is to say, they only applied to white people, not to black people or to enslaved people. Pro-slavery factions thought that it was their right and freedom to enslave other people to work for them.
To abolitionists, liberty and republicanism were universal and applied for everyone. This meant that slavery was not to be permitted, because it went against the very liberty of a whole group of people.
"Erastus D. Ladd is known for his "Description of the Lawrence Massacre" did not think that what these voters did were legal. They murdered a lot of people and ruined a town that was supposed to be Ladd's home. In the account, there were 240 orphans and 85 widows because of the massacre. "
Answer:
I believe that under English Rule Slavery was almost slightly more fair than the way the Dutch used their rule/power
Explanation:
The Dutch West India Company imported 11 African slaves to New Amsterdam in 1626, with the first slave auction being held in New Amsterdam in 1655.
Slavery in Great Britain existed and was recognized from before the Roman occupation until the 12th century, when chattel slavery disappeared, at least for a time, after the Norman Conquest. Former slaves merged into the larger body of serfs in Britain and no longer were recognized separately in law or custom.
The reason it is impractical is they traders had to go around South America... For example, say New York is sending trade ships to San Francisco. They would go all the way down to the bottom of South America and then all they way back up. By creating the panama canal, it allowed ships to cut through the land and make the route more practical.
“DescriptionThe Việt Cộng, also known as the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam, was a mass political organization in South Vietnam and Cambodia with its own army – the Liberation Army of South Vietnam – that fought.”
