But the wickedness which i now begin to expose is immeasurably aggravated by the motive which prompted it. not in any common lust for power did this uncommon tragedy have its origin. it is the invasion of a virgin territory, compelling it to the hateful embrace of slavery; and it may be clearly traced to a depraved longing for a new slave state, the hideous offspring of such a crime, in the hope of adding to the power of slavery in the national government. yes, sir, when the whole world, alike christian and turk, is rising up to condemn this wrong, and to make it a hissing to the nations, here in our republic, force -- aye, sir, force, -- has been openly employed in compelling kansas to this pollution, and all for the sake of political power. there is the simple fact, which you will vainly attempt to deny, but which in itself presents an essential wickedness that makes other public crimes seem like public virtues.” - senator charles sumner, 1856 the excerpt most directly reflects which of these conflicts? a) the debate over immigration and the rise of “nativism” b) the debate over slavery and its extension into the western territories c) the military seizure and occupation of native american lands in the western territories d) the war with mexico and disagreement in the senate over the treaty of guadalupe-hidalgo

B) the debate over slavery and its extension into the western territories

In the United States Senate, The Caning of Charles Sumner, or the Brooks–Sumner Affair, occurred on May 22, 1856. , In this speech, representative Preston Brooks (D-SC) criticized Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA), who was an abolitionist, in vengeance for the expression given by Sumner in which he relentlessly criticized slavery and slaveholders, including a relative of Brooks.

Two days later Brooks brutally beat and almost killed Sumner and it brought a clearly polarized response from the Americans on the question of the expansion of slavery in the United States.

It has been considered representative of the "breakdown of reasoned discussion that ultimately led to the American Civil War.

yes, since there is a positive and a negetive if the positive and negitive wasn't there wouldn't a flow electricity in it.

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.