Answer:
A;
Compromise was necessary becuase if one side (North or South) gained more power in the government, they would just outlaw the other. The compromises delayed the civil war and the issue of slavery over time.
Answer:
Question #12
There were several causes of the conflict between the American settlers and Mexico. First, Mexico feared that they would lose Texas to the United States, so they started enforcing laws that had been ignored. Then, Santa Anna gained power and became a dictator. There were rumors that Santa Anna wanted to drive Americans out of Texas. Americans wanted to overthrow Santa Anna, so this started fighting.
Explanation:
Question #13
One example-
The North and South did not have common ground on the topic of slavery...
The North was working on aboloshing slavery while the cotton-oriented economy of the American South depended on slavery they were practiaclly "resting their shoulders on slavery"
2nd Example-
In 1803 when the nation purchased the vastness of the Louisianna Territory the both side (North and South) constantly had arguments over if slavery would be permitted or aboloished with in their states.
The Northeners were determined to stop slavery while the Southerners still flourished it.
The US Congress grew sick of the bickering between the two and got two sides to see eye to eye on a series of compromises on the issue of slavery.
During the McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819, the southerners became skeptical and worried that the governement would manage to someday outlaw slavery.
In 1820, the South lawmakers grew furious because the federal governemtn raised the prices on land out to the west and they hope the land would be inexpensive so that they could grow their land and cotton supply (in which they used slaves) without spending soo much cash.
This Act was known as Tariff Act of 1832.
The South grew angrily against this tariff and called it "the tarrifs of abominations"
The South Carolina legislature tooka stand against the tarrif which he later made an ordinance called "The Ordincance of Nullification" in which he claimed the tarrifs "unconstituional, oppresive, [harsh], and unjust." He claimed that the state had the right to disregard the new federal tariff laws because it did not support them in any way if not oppose for what they stood for.
Thus came to a point when the South was thinking whether or not to seperate (secede/withdraw) from the United States because of the "unfair and unjustness" propelled against their state. Claiming what the nation did was agaist their "states-rights". They called their military and prepared to seperate..
The former president at the time Andrew Jackson (1767–1845), read the outcries of the South and made a statement claiming that "Can any one of common sense believe the absurdity that a faction of any state, or a state, has a right to secede and destroy this union and the liberty of our country with it; or nullify laws of the union?...Then indeed is our constitution a rope of sand. . . . The union must be preserved, and it will now be tested, by the support I get from the people. I will die for the union" He warned the state that they were willing to use military focre to enforce the law upon them, they could not secede from the US just like that. Yet, indeed he idid bring the tariff unfairness to notice upon him na dbrought it attention.
In the early 1833, the tariff situation was resolved, the federal and South Carolina governments agreed on reduced tariffs. Though the "nullification crisis" still hit the US hard for further years ahead.
I read this i an article and completely re-worded it so you wouldnt deal with plagarizing problems...I hope this helped you:) Took me almost 30 minutes to write down lol....hope I get brainliest (btw your hook on the question is what got me here lol)
