subject
History, 05.10.2019 05:50 jeremiaht7

"in order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others. were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another. perhaps such a plan of constructing the several departments would be less difficult in practice than it may in contemplation appear. some difficulties, however, and some additional expense would attend the execution of it. some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. in the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them."
- from "the federalist papers : no. 51"

1)
in this excerpt from "the federalist papers no. 51," james madison explains the need for
a) three separate branches in american government.
b) a government that can control the violence caused by factions.
c) a way to elect members of government that does not favor a small, elitist class.
d) an explanation to the complaint that the constitution does not have sufficient provisions against standing armies in times of peace.

2)
this excerpt is an example of a primary document. why might you also want to read a secondary source in addition to the primary source?
a) reading primary resources allows you the opportunity to disprove the author of the primary source.
b) primary sources often times leave out many important details that can be found in secondary sources.
c) a scholar who has written a secondary source will provide supporting material about the historical event, person, place or object.
d) secondary sources are a waste of time and offer unreliable information. when given the choice always only stick to primary sources.

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on History

question
History, 21.06.2019 22:30
(10 points! ) why did the other allies like great britain and france not support president wilsons 14 points?
Answers: 1
question
History, 22.06.2019 00:50
Which action by the us war department angered chief red cloud to the point that he refused to sign the treaty of fort laramie ? a) the killing of buffalo by the united states troops b) the appointment of troops to the powder river basin c) the burning of parts of the powder river basin d) the murder of chief red cloud’s wife
Answers: 1
question
History, 22.06.2019 05:30
When this was published in early 1776, many american colonists became convinced that they should act to form a new kind of nation independent from the rule of britain's "cruel" courts
Answers: 1
question
History, 22.06.2019 06:30
Which is one factor that contributed to the rise of sikhism? a. the spread of christianity into india b. opposition to the hindu caste system c. objections to the five pillars of islam d. a return to polytheistic religion
Answers: 1
You know the right answer?
"in order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of...
Questions
question
Arts, 24.02.2021 23:30
question
Social Studies, 24.02.2021 23:30
question
Mathematics, 24.02.2021 23:30
Questions on the website: 13722363