Thomas Gibbons won the case Gibbons v. Ogden in 1824 because he was doing business in more than one state. held state licenses from more than one state. was trying to reduce air pollution. held a federal license to do business.

Thomas Gibbons won the case Gibbons v. Ogden in 1824 because he held a federal license to do business.

Explanation:

The Supreme Court case of Gibbons v. Ogden was a case of a territorial issue where the two parties tried to gain superior authority over the rights involved. This court case set the precedent for how state and federal powers are entertained.

Aaron Ogden and Thomas Gibbons were former partners in the steamboat industry. So, when Gibbons got his own steamboat to operate, the issue of who can ply in the waterways became an issue. Ogden has a state permit while Gibbons's was a federal permit.

When Gibbons operates his steamboat on the waterways of New York, Ogden opposed, claiming that Gibbons has no permit. This case became a fight between the state and federal powers, with the issue of who was to have a higher power. And the court agreed or dictated that the federal government has control or precedence over the state.

So, Gibbons won the case because of his federal licence against Ogden's state licence.

a.  

women in ancient egypt had many legal rights, including the right to own property and businesses.

the fact that could also be added to column b is that during world war ii, specifically between the years 1941 and 1945, japan expanded its territory towards the indonesian territory in what was known later as part of the "pacific war". in that time, japan could conquer the philipines, singapore,   borneo, central java, malang, cebu, sumatra and various other islands of the area, therefore expanding its territory for a brief period of time.