He was a strict constructionist and since the Constitution never explicitly stated that the President had the authority to purchase land, he was conflicted between his views and the incredible opportunity to purchase the entire Louisiana Territory from the French for a mere $15 million. Obviously he ended up making the purchase but his belief in explicit interpretation of the Constitution was what made him unsure.
He was unsure that the Constitution allowed the deal.
No, the Louisiana Purchase Treaty refers to the agreement signed in 1803 between the United States and France. This treaty allowed the United States to purchase a vast territory, including the area of land west of the Mississippi River, known as the Louisiana Territory. It did not buy a continent, but it significantly expanded the size of the United States.
There were a number of factors in the acquisition of the Louisiana Territory on both sides of the purchase. Until it finally came into the hands of the U.S. in 1803, the territory changed hands many times. It was originally claimed by France, but eventually it ended up in the hands of the Spanish. Spain held the territory until 1800, when it was returned to France under the Treaty of San Ildefonso. The treaty was kept a secret, and Spain retained the territory until the deal was announced just three weeks before the purchase in December, 1803. At the time of the Louisiana Purchase, Jefferson was a Republican, which, in the period, was the party that favored strict interpretation of the constitution. Jefferson was the well-respected leader of the party back then, and he was the brain behind the party's platform. Even so, when France was desperate to receive funds from selling off territory and offered the U.S. the unbelievable opportunity to purchase it for only $15,000,000, Jefferson realized that the constitution granted no right for the federal government to purchase land. As a strict constructionist, Jefferson had a conundrum. In the end, he decided to go against his own party's values and call the purchase a "treaty" in order to bypass the lack of a territory acquisition clause in the constitution. As it turned out, his risk payed off and hardly anyone in his party held his lapse of loyalty against him.
He had doubts about the constitutionality of the purchase. Any power not specifically granted to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution belongs to the states or to the people. The Constitution makes no mention regarding the acquiring of new land. It was eventually reasoned that since the power to make treaties was specifically granted to the President, and since the only way to acquire new land, aside from seizing it, is by treaty, then acquiring land by treaty would be unconstitutional only if the Constitution specifically denied the President that power (it does not).
Louis XIV did not sell Louisiana in the Louisiana Purchase. Louisiana was named for Louis Xiv (1638-1715) in 1682.The Louisiana Purchase was consummated on November 30, 1803. In 1803 Louis XIV had been dead for eighty-eight years. The French head of state in 1803 was Napoleon Bonaparte who was "First Consul for Life (of the French Republic)". As such, Bonaparte sold Louisiana to the United States.Why? The United States had already developed a magnificent dream of a Nation from Sea to Shining Sea. It was called Manifest Destiny. It was a golden opportunity to fulfill that dream, and Jefferson while unsure of the legality of such a move forged ahead. Napoleon saw it as money in the bank and a chance to upset the United Kingdom at the same time.
He was unsure if the purchase was allowed by the constitution.
He was unsure if the purchase was allowed by the constitution.
a cell
He was unsure that the Constitution allowed the deal.
He was unsure if it was allowed by the constitution.
He was unsure if it was allowed by the constitution.
No, the Louisiana Purchase Treaty refers to the agreement signed in 1803 between the United States and France. This treaty allowed the United States to purchase a vast territory, including the area of land west of the Mississippi River, known as the Louisiana Territory. It did not buy a continent, but it significantly expanded the size of the United States.
There were a number of factors in the acquisition of the Louisiana Territory on both sides of the purchase. Until it finally came into the hands of the U.S. in 1803, the territory changed hands many times. It was originally claimed by France, but eventually it ended up in the hands of the Spanish. Spain held the territory until 1800, when it was returned to France under the Treaty of San Ildefonso. The treaty was kept a secret, and Spain retained the territory until the deal was announced just three weeks before the purchase in December, 1803. At the time of the Louisiana Purchase, Jefferson was a Republican, which, in the period, was the party that favored strict interpretation of the constitution. Jefferson was the well-respected leader of the party back then, and he was the brain behind the party's platform. Even so, when France was desperate to receive funds from selling off territory and offered the U.S. the unbelievable opportunity to purchase it for only $15,000,000, Jefferson realized that the constitution granted no right for the federal government to purchase land. As a strict constructionist, Jefferson had a conundrum. In the end, he decided to go against his own party's values and call the purchase a "treaty" in order to bypass the lack of a territory acquisition clause in the constitution. As it turned out, his risk payed off and hardly anyone in his party held his lapse of loyalty against him.
Yes, paranoia will make a person unsure on whether they did something. A doctor will be able to prescribe medications for paranoia.
he most likely did but we are unsure to whether or not he did there are no historical recollections stating clearly whether he did
He had doubts about the constitutionality of the purchase. Any power not specifically granted to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution belongs to the states or to the people. The Constitution makes no mention regarding the acquiring of new land. It was eventually reasoned that since the power to make treaties was specifically granted to the President, and since the only way to acquire new land, aside from seizing it, is by treaty, then acquiring land by treaty would be unconstitutional only if the Constitution specifically denied the President that power (it does not).
I'm unsure as to whether or not you made a typo or not, but "aploderivic" is not a word.