What are two examples of people that attempted to free slaves?explain their actions in detail.

Many captured fugitive slaves were flogged, branded, jailed, sold back into slavery, or even killed. Not only did fugitive slaves have the fear of starvation and capture, but there were also threats presented by their surroundings.

two examples are Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey

Explanation:

Nat Turner:"In the morning hours of August 22, Nat Turner and his group murdered their master and his family. After swelling in size to about 60 slaves by afternoon, with more killing and a face-off with a white posse, the group scattered, and Virginia prepared for war. In the aftermath, about 60 slaves were executed.  Turner hid in a hole for a month and a half before discovery. Brought to trial, he was hanged a week later."

Denmark Vesey: "In the 17th and 18th centuries, Jamaica, a British colony with many sugar plantations, was the frequent scene of revolts. One of the most notable took place in 1760; an uprising of hundreds of slaves, led by an enslaved man named Tacky, inspired others across the island during the same period. The only free person to lead a rebellion was Denmark Vesey, an urban artisan of Charleston, South Carolina. Vesey’s rebellion (1822) was to have involved, according to some accounts, as many as 9,000 slaves from the surrounding area, but the conspiracy was betrayed in June before the plan could be effected."

couples could only have one child to reduce the population growth.

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is