You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “History Help Plz…Multiple Choice!!!?”.
History Help Plz…Multiple Choice!!!?
This entry was posted in Land For Sale and tagged Choice, help, history, Multiple, multiple choice, Plz, railroads. Bookmark the permalink.
4 Responses to History Help Plz…Multiple Choice!!!?
number 1 A
number 2- B
I am not quite sure but it matches up with what I know and with my findings- Hope this is some help
Report Spam/Abuse
c , b
Report Spam/Abuse
# 2 – is B.
Report Spam/Abuse
1 – Even though states did not directly build railroads, B) private firms received bond subsidies from states. The way this question’s worded, that’s the BEST answer, because monopoly rights could only be granted by the federal government, not the states (which invalidates A); the stock was most often purchased through dummy corporations owned by the railroad itself (e.g., Credit Mobilier, a major scandal of the Grant administration, which invalidates C), and since interference with railroads –or any good or service which crosses state lines — would violate interstate commerce, a federal crime, it’s Washington, DC which purchased land from the states, not granted it (which invalidates D).
2 – A difference between craftsmen in the US and Europe was that in B) the US, workers more likely had to learn to operate specialized machinery. Again, this is a BEST answer because C and D presume a lack of any need for specialization in industry, which can’t happen except in an agrarian society. I choose B over A because of the wording “workers more likely had to learn”; as the United States became the beneficiary (and later the biggest contributor to) the ongoing Industrial Revolution in the West, there was a greater need for specialization there. It sounds like both questions are written post-Civil War (when railroads began to snake across the North American continent to the closing of the frontier), and you could argue that’s when the Industrial Revolution actually ended or at least entered a new phase, versus the oft-quoted account of England in the mid-19th century.
Does this help? Sorry if I’m getting a little too explanatory, but . . . if these are test questions, they’re not the most clearly worded.
Have a great weekend, and Happy New Year!
Report Spam/Abuse