Saturday, April 20, 2024
07:11 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Optional subjects > Group IV > History of USA

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #21  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

In the landmark Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall handed down one of his most important decisions regarding the expansion of Federal power. This case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, which sparked the even broader issue of the division of powers between state and the Federal Government.

In 1816 Congress established the Second National Bank to help control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states questioned the constitutionality of the national bank, and Maryland set a precedent by requiring taxes on all banks not chartered by the state. In 1818 the State of Maryland approved legislation to impose taxes on the Second National Bank chartered by Congress.

James W. McCulloch, a Federal cashier at the Baltimore branch of the U.S. bank, refused to pay the taxes imposed by the state. Maryland filed a suit against McCulloch in an effort to collect the taxes. The Supreme Court, however, decided that the chartering of a bank was an implied power of the Constitution, under the “elastic clause,” which granted Congress the authority to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution” the work of the Federal Government.

This case presented a major issue that challenged the Constitution: Does the Federal Government hold sovereign power over states? The proceedings posed two questions: Does the Constitution give Congress power to create a bank? And could individual states ban or tax the bank? The court decided that the Federal Government had the right and power to set up a Federal bank and that states did not have the power to tax the Federal Government. Marshall ruled in favor of the Federal Government and concluded, “the power to tax involves the power to destroy."
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #22  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Missouri Compromise (1820)

Missouri Compromise (1820)
With the purchase of the Louisiana Territory and the application of Missouri for statehood, the long-standing balance between the number of slave states and the number of free states would be changed. Controversy arose within Congress over the issue of slavery.

Congress adopted this legislation and admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a non-slave state at the same time, so that the balance between slave and free states in the nation would remain equal. The Missouri compromise also proposed that slavery be prohibited above the 36º 30´ latitude line in the remainder of the Louisiana Territory. This provision held for 34 years, until it was repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017)
  #23  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Monroe Doctrine (1823)

Monroe Doctrine (1823)

President James Monroe’s 1823 annual message to Congress contained the Monroe Doctrine, which warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere.

Understandably, the United States has always taken a particular interest in its closest neighbors – the nations of the Western Hemisphere. Equally understandably, expressions of this concern have not always been favorably regarded by other American nations.

The Monroe Doctrine is the best known U.S. policy toward the Western Hemisphere. Buried in a routine annual message delivered to Congress by President James Monroe in December 1823, the doctrine warns European nations that the United States would not tolerate further colonization or puppet monarchs. The doctrine was conceived to meet major concerns of the moment, but it soon became a watchword of U.S. policy in the Western Hemisphere.

The Monroe Doctrine was invoked in 1865 when the U.S. government exerted diplomatic and military pressure in support of the Mexican President Benito Juárez. This support enabled Juárez to lead a successful revolt against the Emperor Maximilian, who had been placed on the throne by the French government.

Almost 40 years later, in 1904, European creditors of a number of Latin American countries threatened armed intervention to collect debts. President Theodore Roosevelt promptly proclaimed the right of the United States to exercise an “international police power” to curb such “chronic wrongdoing.” As a result, U. S. Marines were sent into Santo Domingo in 1904, Nicaragua in 1911, and Haiti in 1915, ostensibly to keep the Europeans out. Other Latin American nations viewed these interventions with misgiving, and relations between the “great Colossus of the North” and its southern neighbors remained strained for many years.

In 1962, the Monroe Doctrine was invoked symbolically when the Soviet Union began to build missile-launching sites in Cuba. With the support of the Organization of American States, President John F. Kennedy threw a naval and air quarantine around the island. After several tense days, the Soviet Union agreed to withdraw the missiles and dismantle the sites. Subsequently, the United States dismantled several of its obsolete air and missile bases in Turkey.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #24  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

Robert Fulton’s 1807 invention of the steamboat was highly significant, but its application would have been severely limited had the Supreme Court not ruled against the monopoly in interstate steamboat operation in Gibbons v. Ogden. In this decision, Chief Justice John Marshall’s Court ruled that Congress has the power to “regulate commerce” and that Federal law takes precedence over state laws.

The State of New York passed a law giving Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston a monopoly on steamboat traffic on the Hudson Bay, "navigating all boats that might be propelled by steam, on all waters within the territory, or jurisdiction of the State, for the term of twenty years." Fulton and Livingston issued permits and seized boats that operated without their endorsement.

Aaron Ogden had a license from the State of New York to navigate between New York City and the New Jersey Shore. Ogden found himself competing with Thomas Gibbons, who had been given permission to use the waterways by the Federal Government. After the State of New York denied Gibbons access to the Hudson Bay, he sued Ogden.

The case went to the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Marshall's opinion carried out the clear original intent of the Constitution to have Congress, not the states, regulate interstate commerce. Marshall’s decision sustained the nationalist definition of Federal power and ruled that Congress could constitutionally regulate many activities that affected interstate commerce.

In the wake of this decision, the Federal Government, empowered by the Constitution’s commerce clause, increasingly exercised its authority by legislation and judicial decision over the whole range of the nation’s economic life.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #25  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default President Andrew Jackson's Message to Congress 'On Indian Removal' (1830)

President Andrew Jackson's Message to Congress 'On Indian Removal' (1830)

On December 6, 1830, in a message to Congress, President Andrew Jackson called for the relocation of eastern Native American tribes to land west of the Mississippi River, in order to open new land for settlement by citizens of the United States.

With the onset of westward expansion and increased contact with Indian tribes, President Jackson set the tone for his position on Indian affairs in his message to Congress on December 6, 1830. Jackson’s message justified the removal policy already established by the Indian Removal Act of May 28, 1830.

The Indian Removal Act was passed to open up for settlement those lands still held by Indians in states east of the Mississippi River, primarily Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, and others. Jackson declared that removal would “incalculably strengthen the southwestern frontier.” Clearing Alabama and Mississippi of their Indian populations, he said, would “enable those states to advance rapidly in population, wealth, and power.”

White inhabitants of Georgia were particularly anxious to have the Cherokees removed from the state because gold had been discovered on tribal lands. Violence was commonplace in Georgia, and in all likelihood, a portion of the tribe would have been decimated if they had not been removed.

Removal of the Indian tribes continued beyond Jackson’s tenure as President. The most infamous of the removals took place in 1838, two years after the end of Jackson’s final term, when the Cherokee Indians were forcibly removed by the military. Their journey west became known as the “Trail of Tears,” because of the thousands of deaths along the way.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #26  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848)

Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848)

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which brought an official end to the Mexican-American War (1846–48), was signed on February 2, 1848, at Guadalupe Hidalgo, a city to which the Mexican government had fled with the advance of U.S. forces.

With the defeat of its army and the fall of the capital, Mexico City, in September 1847, the Mexican government surrendered to the United States and entered into negotiations to end the war. The peace talks were negotiated by Nicholas Trist, chief clerk of the State Department, who had accompanied General Winfield Scott as a diplomat and President Polk's representative. Trist and General Scott, after two previous unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a treaty with President Santa Anna, determined that the only way to deal with Mexico was as a conquered enemy. Nicholas Trist negotiated with a special commission representing the collapsed government led by Don Bernardo Couto, Don Miguel Atristain, and Don Luis Gonzaga Cuevas.

President Polk had recalled Trist under the belief that negotiations would be carried out with a Mexican delegation in Washington. In the six weeks it took to deliver Polk's message, Trist had received word that the Mexican government had named its special commission to negotiate. Trist determined that Washington did not understand the situation in Mexico and negotiated the peace treaty in defiance of the President.

In a December 4, 1847, letter to his wife, he wrote, "Knowing it to be the very last chance and impressed with the dreadful consequences to our country which cannot fail to attend the loss of that chance, I decided today at noon to attempt to make a treaty; the decision is altogether my own."
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #27  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Compromise of 1850 (1850)

Compromise of 1850 (1850)

By 1850 sectional disagreements centering on slavery were straining the bonds of union between the North and South. These tensions became especially acute when Congress began to consider whether western lands acquired after the Mexican War would permit slavery. In 1849 California requested permission to enter the Union as a free state. Adding more free state senators to Congress would destroy the balance between slave and free states that had existed since the Missouri Compromise of 1820.

Because everyone looked to the Senate to defuse the growing crisis, Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky proposed a series of resolutions designed to "Adjust amicably all existing questions of controversy, arising out of the institution of slavery." Clay attempted to frame his compromise so that nationally minded senators would vote for legislation in the interest of the Union.

In one of the most famous congressional debates in American history, the Senate discussed Clay’s solution for 7 months. It initially voted down his legislative package, but Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois stepped forward with substitute bills, which passed both Houses. With the Compromise of 1850, Congress had addressed the immediate crisis created by territorial expansion. But one aspect of the compromise—a strengthened fugitive slave act—soon began to tear at sectional peace.

The Compromise of 1850 is composed of five statues enacted in September of 1850. The acts called for the admission of California as a “free state,” provided for a territorial government for Utah and New Mexico, established a boundary between Texas and the United States, called for the abolition of slave trade in Washington, DC, and amended the Fugitive Slave Act.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #28  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

In January 1854, Senator Stephen Douglas introduced a bill that divided the land west of Missouri into two territories, Kansas and Nebraska. He argued for popular sovereignty, which would allow the settlers of the new territories to decide if slavery would be legal there. Antislavery supporters were outraged because, under the terms of the Missouri Compromise of 1820, slavery would have been outlawed in both territories.

After months of debate, the Kansas-Nebraska Act passed on May 30, 1854. Pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers rushed to Kansas, each side hoping to determine the results of the first election held after the law went into effect. The conflict turned violent, aggravating the split between North and South until reconciliation was virtually impossible.

Opponents of the Kansas-Nebraska Act helped found the Republican Party, which opposed the spread of slavery into the territories. As a result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the United States moved closer to Civil War.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #29  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)

Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)

In 1846 a slave named Dred Scott and his wife, Harriet, sued for their freedom in a St. Louis city court. The odds were in their favor. They had lived with their owner, an army surgeon, at Fort Snelling, then in the free Territory of Wisconsin. The Scotts' freedom could be established on the grounds that they had been held in bondage for extended periods in a free territory and were then returned to a slave state. Courts had ruled this way in the past. However, what appeared to be a straightforward lawsuit between two private parties became an 11-year legal struggle that culminated in one of the most notorious decisions ever issued by the United States Supreme Court.

On its way to the Supreme Court, the Dred Scott case grew in scope and significance as slavery became the single most explosive issue in American politics. By the time the case reached the high court, it had come to have enormous political implications for the entire nation.

On March 6, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney read the majority opinion of the Court, which stated that slaves were not citizens of the United States and, therefore, could not expect any protection from the Federal Government or the courts. The opinion also stated that Congress had no authority to ban slavery from a Federal territory. This decision moved the nation a step closer to Civil War.

The decision of Scott v. Sanford, considered by legal scholars to be the worst ever rendered by the Supreme Court, was overturned by the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution, which abolished slavery and declared all persons born in the United States to be citizens of the United States.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
  #30  
Old Saturday, May 27, 2017
hmkashif's Avatar
Senior Member
Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason: CE 2014 - Roll no. 13077
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 501
Thanks: 126
Thanked 1,135 Times in 364 Posts
hmkashif is on a distinguished road
Default Telegram Announcing the Surrender of Fort Sumter (1861)

Telegram Announcing the Surrender of Fort Sumter (1861)

On April 10, 1861, Brig. Gen. Pierre G.T. Beauregard, in command of the provisional Confederate forces at Charleston, SC, demanded the surrender of the U.S. garrison of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. Garrison commander Robert Anderson refused. On April 12, Confederate batteries opened fire on the fort, which was unable to reply effectively. At 2:30 p.m., April 13, Major Anderson surrendered Fort Sumter, evacuating the garrison on the following day. The bombardment of Fort Sumter was the opening engagement of the American Civil War. From 1863 to 1865, the Confederates at Fort Sumter withstood a 22-month siege by Union forces. During this time, most of the fort was reduced to brick rubble.
__________________
“What we need in this country today is more courage and more belief in the things that we have.”- Thomas J. Watson
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to hmkashif For This Useful Post:
andreapirlo (Thursday, June 08, 2017), BrianTheGooch (Sunday, October 08, 2017), CaprioMarucci (Sunday, May 28, 2017), kaka88 (Sunday, October 08, 2017), TaliSalim (Sunday, October 22, 2017)
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PPSC one Paper Preparation Material all in one Monk Past Papers 22 Friday, July 17, 2020 10:57 PM
Pakistan's History From 1947-till present Sumairs Pakistan Affairs 13 Sunday, October 27, 2019 02:55 PM
How to make Good Notes? rose_pak Tips and Experience Sharing 7 Thursday, October 17, 2019 10:30 AM
Indian History (Part II) from 1526 - 1857 (Compiled Notes) qadeermercy History of Pakistan & India 0 Friday, February 12, 2016 01:16 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.