Answer:
Explanation:
The Debate over Ratification Those who supported the Constitution became known as federalists and those who opposed its ratification were called antifederalists. ... The antifederalists favored strong state governments and believed that the national government created by the Constitution was too strong.
Federalists argued that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights, because the people and the states kept any powers not given to the federal government. Anti-Federalists held that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty.
The amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, were designed to protect the basic rights of U.S. citizens, guaranteeing the freedom of speech, press, assembly, and exercise of religion; the right to fair legal procedure and to bear arms; and that powers not delegated to the federal government were reserved for the states ...
Answer:
from October 1835 to April 1836 between Mexico and Texas colonists that resulted in Texas’s independence from Mexico and the founding of the Republic of Texas (1836–45). Although the Texas Revolution was bookended by the Battles of Gonzales and San Jacinto, armed conflict and political turmoil that pitted Texians (Anglo-American settlers of the Mexican state of Coahuila and Texas) and Tejanos (Texans of mixed Mexican and Indian descent) against the forces of the Mexican government had occurred intermittently since at least 1826.
Colonial Texas
Having won its independence from Spain in 1821, the fledgling Republic of Mexico sought to gain control of its northern reaches, which under the Spanish had functioned as an extensive and largely empty bulwark against encroachment by competing French and British empires to the north. That northern region, which became the state of Coahuila and Texas under the federal system created by the Mexican constitution of 1824, was thinly populated by Mexicans and dominated by the Apache and Comanche Native American peoples. Because most Mexicans were reluctant to relocate there, the Mexican government encouraged Americans and other foreigners to settle there (Spain had opened the region to Anglo-American settlement in 1820). Mexico also exempted the settlers from certain tariffs and taxes for seven years under the Imperial Colonization Law of January 1823. Moreover, though Mexico had banned slavery in 1829, it allowed American immigrant slaveholders to continue using the labour of enslaved people.
Among those who made the most of the opportunity to settle in Texas were Green Dewitt and Moses Austin, Americans bestowed with the title empresario by being granted large tracts of land on which to establish colonies of hundreds of families. Austin died before he could begin that undertaking, but his son, Stephen Austin, realized his father’s ambition and became arguably the most-influential Texian. In fact, in 1826, a militia led by Austin aided the Mexican military in suppressing the Freedonian Rebellion, an early attempt at securing independence from Mexico by settlers in the area around Nacogdoches that had resulted largely from a conflict between old settlers and those who had arrived as part of the grant to empresario Hayden Edwards.
Explanation:
I believe the answer is A, good luck
Answer:
they were more slave owners in the south because they wanted to make more money
Well, I would have refrained more from attacking to not cause any troubles but assist my allies as they are fighting their enemies. Also, I would have gained more dominance over the small countries before going for the big ones.
