Hamilton argued that the natural faculties of blacks were as good as those of free whites, and he warned that the British would arm the slaves if the patriots did not. In his 21st-century biography, Chernow cites this incident as evidence that Hamilton and Laurens saw the Revolution and the struggle against slavery as inseparable. Hamilton attacked his political opponents as demanding freedom for themselves and refusing to allow it to blacks. In January 1785, Hamilton attended the second meeting of the New York Manumission Society (NYMS). John Jay was president and Hamilton was the first secretary and later became president. Chernow notes how the membership soon included many of Hamilton's friends and associates. Hamilton was a member of the committee of the society that petitioned the legislature to end the slave trade, and that succeeded in passing legislation banning the export of slaves from New York. In the same period, Hamilton felt bound by the rule of law of the time and his law practice facilitated the return of a fugitive slave to Henry Laurens of South Carolina. He opposed the compromise at the 1787 Constitutional Convention by which the federal government could not abolish the slave trade for 20 years, and was disappointed when he lost that argument. Hamilton never supported forced emigration for freed slaves. Horton has argued from this that he would be comfortable with a multiracial society, and that this distinguished him from his contemporaries. In international affairs, he supported Toussaint L'Ouverture's black government in Haiti after the revolt that overthrew French control, as he had supported aid to the slaveowners in 1791--both measures hurt France. Scant evidence has been interpreted by a few to indicate Hamilton may have owned household slaves, as did many wealthy New Yorkers (the evidence for this is indirect; McDonald interprets it as referring to paid employees).
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION: Who became president of the NYMS after John Jay?

Dam Good Luck: From the beginning, Las Vegas was built to serve travelers. The railroad needed a way station, and Las Vegas was the place. Growth continued for ten years, and by 1915 the town had telephones, round-the-clock electricity, and a growing populationmany of whom worked in the railroad repair shop. But such heady progress would soon come to a halt. The growing competition in rail transport resulted in Union Pacific buying the Los AngelesSalt Lake line. Union Pacific then consolidated its operations, eliminating the Las Vegas repair facility. Additionally, Las Vegas had been made a part of Nevada's new Clark County in 1909, a year when the legislature also outlawed gambling. These unfortunate circumstances threatened to relegate Las Vegas to the status of a small desert community that could no longer support its 3000 residents. But the southwest's growing need for water, combined with Las Vegas's fortuitous proximity to the Colorado River, would give Las Vegas a second chance to achieve prosperity. Construction on Hoover Dam (originally Boulder Dam, subsequently renamed for the president who authorized the project) began in 1931 in a canyon 45 miles (72 km) southeast of Las Vegas. Providing an influx of $165 million to the southwestern economy, Hoover Dam played a major role in preventing Las Vegas from drying up, both financially and literally. Not only did it create jobs, but it also created Lake Mead, the massive reservoir that today provides water to all of southern Nevada. More Government Help: The construction of Hoover Dam did not single-handedly save Las Vegas, however. The state legislature helped as well, by legalizing gambling in 1931 and thus solidifying the future of the town, though legislators and residents could never have known this at the time. The hordes of people who attended Hoover Dam's 1935 dedication set the city's now-formidable public relations machine into action. They went to work on what has become one of the lengthiest citywide tourism campaigns ever attempted. It didn't take long for the city to establish itself as a wild-West town with an "anything goes" attitude. Vices outlawed or heavily controlled elsewhere were legal here, available any hour of any day (or night).
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION: What circumstances threatened to relegate Las Vegas to the status of a small desert community that could no longer support its 3000 residents?

Mr. Thorndike had risen, and, in farewell, was holding out his hand to Andrews. He turned, and across the court-room the eyes of the financier and the stenographer met. At the sight of the great man, Spear flushed crimson, and then his look of despair slowly disappeared; and into his eyes there came incredulously hope and gratitude. He turned his head suddenly to the wall. Mr. Thorndike stood irresolute, and then sank back into his chair. The first man in the line was already at the railing, and the questions put to him by the judge were being repeated to him by the other assistant district attorney and a court attendant. His muttered answers were in turn repeated to the judge. "Says he's married, naturalized citizen, Lutheran Church, die- cutter by profession." The probation officer, her hands filled with papers, bustled forward and whispered. "Mrs. Austin says," continued the district attorney, "she's looked into this case, and asks to have the man turned over to her. He has a wife and three children; has supported them for five years." "Is the wife in court?" the judge said. A thin, washed-out, pretty woman stood up, and clasped her hands in front of her. "Has this man been a good husband to you, madam?" asked the young judge. The woman broke into vehement assurances. No man could have been a better husband. Would she take him back? Indeed she would take him back. She held out her hands as though she would physically drag her husband from the pillory. The judge bowed toward the probation officer, and she beckoned the prisoner to her.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION: Was the first man in line a good husband?

(CNN) -- Jo-Wilfried Tsonga ended Roger Federer's hopes of winning a record-equaling seventh Wimbledon title on Wednesday as the French 12th seed staged a stunning fightback to reach the semifinals. Federer appeared to be cruising into the last four after winning the first two sets, but Tsonga inflicted the Swiss world No. 3's first defeat from that vantage point in 179 grand slam matches. It was only the third time in the 29-year-old's glittering career that the 16-time grand slam champion had surrendered a two-set lead. Tsonga, ranked 19th in the world, triumphed 3-6 6-7 (3-7) 6-4 6-4 6-4 on Centre Court, serving out to love as he earned a clash with second seed Novak Djokovic. The Serbian, who beat Tsonga in the 2008 Australian Open final, ended the dream run of Australian 18-year-old Bernard Tomic. Tsonga defeated Federer for just the second time in six meetings, their first on grass. "It was amazing. I played unbelievable. It's never easy to come back against Roger. I'm so happy, it's crazy," the 26-year-old told reporters after reaching the semifinals at Wimbledon for the first time. "He's the biggest champion in the sport. He has achieved so much and is the best player in the world. To be two sets down and come back was unbelievable. I served really well. Against Djokovic I will have to come out and do the same again." Federer has now lost in the quarterfinals two years in a row, being beaten by eventual runner-up Tomas Berdych in 2010. "Jo played great. Really from start to finish I don't remember seeing a break point after I broke him in the first game," Federer said.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION:
Which two players did Roger Federer lose to in consecutive Wimbledon Semifinals matches?