I have 3 History question that I am completely stuck on. Please help? Thanks
Which answer best describes an important outcome of the Gibbons v. Ogden court case?
The case set definitions for navigation and placed state control over all coastal and river trade.
The case set definitions for navigation and placed federal control over all coastal and river trade.
The case set the precedent for Congress to override a federal law when it conflicts with a state law.
The case set the precedent for Congress to override a state law when it conflicts with a federal law.
Which of the following required land to be paid for in gold or silver, instead of paper money?
the Tariff of 1828
the Specie Circular
the corrupt bargain
the Nullification Convention
What was the main attraction for settlers moving from northern states to Florida after the Second Seminole War?
Water was plentiful.
Slaves were allowed.
Land was abundant.
Indians were no longer a threat.
Gibbons v. Ogden
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1824/1824_0
land to be paid for in gold or silver,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specie_Circular
main attraction for settlers moving from northern states to Florida
http://www.abfla.com/1tocf/seminole/semhistory.html
Tarrif of 1828
To answer the first question, which is about the outcome of the Gibbons v. Ogden court case, it is necessary to understand the case and its significance in U.S. history. The case, heard by the Supreme Court in 1824, dealt with a conflict between two steamboat operators over a New York state law granting a monopoly on steamboat navigation. The Court's decision, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, had important implications for the division of powers between the federal and state governments.
Now, let's examine the answer choices:
1. The case set definitions for navigation and placed state control over all coastal and river trade.
This option suggests that the case gave states the authority to control all coastal and river trade. However, this is incorrect because the Court actually ruled in favor of federal control, striking down the New York law.
2. The case set definitions for navigation and placed federal control over all coastal and river trade.
This option suggests that the case established federal control over coastal and river trade. This is the correct answer as it accurately reflects the outcome of the case. The ruling in Gibbons v. Ogden expanded the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce, including navigation.
3. The case set the precedent for Congress to override a federal law when it conflicts with a state law.
This option suggests that the case established the precedent for Congress to override a federal law when it conflicts with a state law. However, this is not the correct answer because the ruling upheld federal law and limited the power of states in regulating interstate commerce.
4. The case set the precedent for Congress to override a state law when it conflicts with a federal law.
This option suggests that the case established the precedent for Congress to override a state law when it conflicts with a federal law. However, this is not the correct answer because the ruling reinforced federal authority over state laws.
Therefore, the second answer choice, "The case set definitions for navigation and placed federal control over all coastal and river trade," is the best description of the outcome of the Gibbons v. Ogden court case.
Moving on to the second question, which asks about a policy that required land to be paid for in gold or silver instead of paper money:
1. the Tariff of 1828
The Tariff of 1828, also known as the "Tariff of Abominations," was a protective tariff passed by Congress to protect American manufacturers. However, this policy did not pertain to land purchases and is not the correct answer.
2. the Specie Circular
The Specie Circular was an executive order issued by President Andrew Jackson in 1836. It required payment for government land to be made in gold or silver, rather than paper money (specifically, banknotes). This policy aimed to combat speculative land purchases and prevent the inflationary effects of excessive paper currency.
3. the corrupt bargain
The "corrupt bargain" refers to the alleged political deal that took place during the presidential election of 1824, which involved Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams. It is unrelated to the question and not the correct answer.
4. the Nullification Convention
The Nullification Convention refers to a series of state conventions held in South Carolina in 1832 in response to the Tariff of 1832. It dealt with the issue of states' rights and the power to nullify federal laws, not the requirement of gold or silver payment for land.
Therefore, the correct answer is "the Specie Circular," as it was the policy that required land to be paid for in gold or silver, rather than paper money.
Moving on to the third question, concerning the main attraction for settlers moving from northern states to Florida after the Second Seminole War:
1. Water was plentiful.
This option suggests that water availability was the main attraction for these settlers. While water can be important for various reasons, it does not specifically address the motivations of settlers moving from northern states to Florida.
2. Slaves were allowed.
This option suggests that the allowance of slavery was the primary reason for settlers moving to Florida. However, this is not accurate as the abolition of slavery had yet to occur, and the presence or absence of slaves likely would not have been a significant factor in attracting settlers.
3. Land was abundant.
This option suggests that the abundance of land was the main attraction for settlers. This is the correct answer since after the Second Seminole War, the U.S. government acquired more land from Native Americans, offering opportunities for settlers seeking to establish farms or acquire property.
4. Indians were no longer a threat.
This option suggests that the absence of Native American threats was the main reason for settlers moving to Florida. While the end of the Second Seminole War did reduce hostilities with Native Americans, this factor alone would not have been the primary attraction for settlers.
Therefore, the correct answer is "Land was abundant," as it accurately reflects the main attraction for settlers moving from northern states to Florida after the Second Seminole War.