PLEASE HELP ME What claim do the authors make in this passage?
Read the passage from Sugar Changed the World.

You could date a great change in the world to a visit one Madame Villeneuve made to France in 1714. That year, Pauline, an enslaved woman from the Caribbean, arrived in France as the personal servant of her mistress. When Madame Villeneuve set off from the coast to visit Paris, she left Pauline in a convent. The young woman spent her time studying with the nuns and went so far in her training that she asked to become a nun herself and remain in the convent. The nuns agreed, which enraged Madame Villeneuve. She rushed to a judge, demanding to have her property back. Was Pauline a free woman, a bride of Christ, or an item to be bought, sold, and warehoused when she was not in use?

Twenty-three years earlier, King Louis XIV had issued a set of rules that defined slavery as legal in the French sugar islands. But when two slaves managed to reach France, he freed them—saying they became free "as soon as they [touched] the soil" of France. The judges sided with Pauline—she was real to them, human, not a piece of property. For Pauline's judges, as for King Louis, slavery far off across the seas was completely different from enslaved individuals in France.

A- Madame Villeneuve deserves credit for persuading the judges that enslaved people should not be property.
B- The judges' freeing of Pauline would have a significant effect on how people viewed involuntary servitude.
C- Because so many other people remained enslaved, Pauline's specific case was not very important.
D- The disagreement between King Louis XIV and the judges would have major effects on laws.
PLEASE HELP ME

Hurry 50pts read the excerpt from justice curtis’s dissenting opinion, then answer the question that follows. slavery, being contrary to natural right, is created only by municipal law. this is not only plain in itself, and agreed by all writers on the subject, but is inferable from the constitution, and has been explicitly declared by this court. the constitution refers to slaves as “persons held to service in one state, under the laws thereof.” . . . . it was certainly understood by the convention which framed the constitution, and has been so understood ever since, that, under the power to regulate commerce, congress could prohibit the importation of slaves; and the exercise of the power was restrained till 1808. a citizen of the united states owns slaves in cuba, and brings them to the united states, where they are set free by the legislation of congress. does this legislation deprive him of his property without due process of law? if so, what becomes of the laws prohibiting the slave trade? if not, how can a similar regulation respecting a territory violate the fifth amendment of the constitution? . . for these reasons, i am of opinion that so much of the several acts of congress as prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude within that part of the territory of wisconsin . . were constitutional and valid laws. –dissenting opinion on dred scott v. sandford, justice benjamin curtis which evidence best supports curtis’s opinion that dred scott should be free because he lived in a free territory? check all that apply. “the constitution refers to slaves as ‘persons held to service in one state’” “the convention which framed the constitution . . has . . the power to regulate commerce.” “a citizen of the united states owns slaves in cuba.” “does this legislation deprive him of his property without due process of law? ” “acts of congress as prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude within that part of the territory of wisconsin . . were constitutional and valid laws.”

In this example, what does the author use to describe laurie

Gloom and glory what does the speaker suddenly see and hear in the poem?