Answer:
Option C
Explanation:
Well known in London social and literary circles during his lifetime, Sancho achieved lasting fame with the posthumous publication of his Letters of the Late Ignatius Sancho, an African. The 158 letters collected in this volume cover a wide range of subjects—including literature, politics, and race—and offer Sancho's unique perspective as a former slave and one of the only middle-class Black men living in eighteenth-century London. Sancho's letters also reveal him to be a man of generosity, warmth, and humor who enjoyed the company of friends from many different stations in life. In his own day, Sancho was thought of as “the extraordinary Negro,” and to eighteenth-century British opponents of the slave trade he became a symbol of the humanity of Africans, something that at the time was disputed by many.
Answer:
Because Dred Scott and his family were born in the United States, they are citizens with all the rights granted by the Constitution.
Explanation:
According to a different source, this is the passage that the question refers to:
<em>"It will be observed, that the plea applies to that class of persons only whose ancestors were negroes of the African race, and imported into this country, and sold and held as slaves. The only matter in issue before the court, therefore, is, whether the descendants of such slaves, when they shall be emancipated, or who are born of parents who had become free before their birth, are citizens of a State, in the sense in which the word "citizen” is used in the Constitution of the United States. . . . . . . The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States."</em>
In this passage, the opinion of the author is that Dred Scott cannot be considered an American citizen because he is the descendant of slaves. The author argues that slaves were not considered as "citizens" when the Constitution was written, and therefore, their children cannot be citizens either. However, a counterclaim to this statement would be the argument that Dred Scott and his family should be considered citizens because they were born in the United States, and therefore, deserve all the rights that citizenship grants them.
The choice of this phrase has a paradoxical meaning in a way that Bartleby refuses to do the task asked from him and the expression of this rejection. It is a refusal, but at the same time it is a polite refusal because even when his boss asks again "You will not?", he answers again with "I prefer not". The phrase emphasizes Bartleby's passive resistance. The different use of the phrase, of course could have had a different effect in the story. It might cause a different demonstration and a different ending for the story. The boss could have replied differently because the refusal would be not polite then. However, the choice is intentional because of the development of the story. Therefore, it is suitable in its own way.
In Christopher Marlowe's "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus", Faustus begin to believe that human salvation became impossible is because of the fact that he believed in Predestination. It's a theory wherein humans are already fated ever since they are born, and due to the evil in the world, he deemed that it's actually impossible to save humankind.
I would go with option a) or d)
