yes there were mariners, indentured servants, and slaves in New Hampshire
there was no slavery in Ohio. PS. AT ONE TIME THERE WAS THOUGH
No, there was no problem between the Colony of New Hampshire and the colony of New York.
Not principally. They wanted to stop the creation of any new slave-states.
The South depended on slavery as the mainstay of the cotton industry, their only export. So when the debate heated up through the 50's, they started asking the church ministers to declare that slavery was a perfect God-given arrangement of master and man. The North was somewhat hypocritical about slavery. They were enjoying the benefit of the cotton revenues, and most of them did not object to slavery in its traditional heartlands. But any extension of slavery into the new Western territories might make the South rich enough to break away and form a separate nation - taking the cotton revenues with them. So they objected to any extension of slavery, and Lincoln's endorsement of this principle was what actually triggered war. (They, of course, used church ministers to declare slavery ungodly.) It is true that the prospect of a vast new slave-empire did cause some Northerners to review their beliefs about the ethics of slavery, and the Abolitionist lobby gained influence in Congress because of this.
The document that said slavery was not permitted in any area won from Mexico was known as the Wilmot Proviso.
Yes.Franklin Pierce was born in New Hampshire.
Yes in fact he died without ever seeing it.
are there any section 8 houses available in salem New hampshire?
yes
there was no slavery in Ohio. PS. AT ONE TIME THERE WAS THOUGH
No, there was no problem between the Colony of New Hampshire and the colony of New York.
no
no
Mount Eisenhower named after President Eisenhower in New Hampshire. I'm not aware where it is in New Hampshire.
never will be
hi how are you doing ebebe
no