Why could someone argue that the north was complicit in the expansion of slavery? most in the north wanted to reopen the importation of slaves. some slaves ran away to northern states. northern factory demand for cotton steadily increased. many northern states had slaves at one time. some slaveholders were originally from the north?

The correct answer is northern factory demand for cotton steadily increased

The North was complicit in the expansion of slavery due to its increased demand for cotton. This led the slaveholders to want to keep their slaves to aid in the production of the cotton so as to increase their fortunes

answer: d. joseph james clark​

explanation:

"the sepoy rebellion was the result of many, many influences and stressors on the cultures of india living under british rule. in britain, it's called the sepoy mutiny on the indian mutiny, but in india, it's called the first war of independence.

the main reason is concerned to the british paramountcy , the belief in british   dominance in india political, economic and cultural life had been introduced in india about 1820."

"they were forced to grow crops that benefited the colonizing nations instead of feeding their own people."