The League of Nations did not do as well as it could have because the United States did not participate in it.
Answer:
The middles colonies had rich farmland and a moderate climate. This made it a more suitable place to grow grain and livestock than New England. ... The Southern colonies had fertile farmlands which contributed to the rise of cash crops such as rice, tobacco, and indigo.
Explanation:
hope this helps!
Answer:
the start of the seventeenth century, the English had not established a permanent settlement in the Americas. Over the next century, however, they outpaced their rivals. The English encouraged emigration far more than the Spanish, French, or Dutch. They established nearly a dozen colonies, sending swarms of immigrants to populate the land. England had experienced a dramatic rise in population in the sixteenth century, and the colonies appeared a welcoming place for those who faced overcrowding and grinding poverty at home. Thousands of English migrants arrived in the Chesapeake Bay colonies of Virginia and Maryland to work in the tobacco fields. Another stream, this one of pious Puritan families, sought to live as they believed scripture demanded and established the Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, New Haven, Connecticut, and Rhode Island colonies of New England.
Answer:
Federalist Papers to help people to understand the US Constitution.
Explanation:
There are 85 essays in Federalist Papers which were printed in New York newspapers while New York State was deciding whether or not to support the U.S. Constitution. These are a series of eighty-five letters written to newspapers in 1787-1788 by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, urging ratification of the Constitution Other newspapers outside New York also published the essays as other states were deciding to ratify the Constitution. In 1788, the papers were published together in a book called The Federalist. As of today, the people still read the Federalist Papers to help them understand the Constitution.
Hamilton, who wrote about two-thirds of the essays has addressed the objections of opponents, who feared a tyrannical central government that would supersede states’ rights and encroach on individual liberties. All strong nationalists, the essayists argued that, most important, the proposed system would preserve the Union, now in danger of breaking apart, and empower the federal government to act firmly and coherently in the national interest. Conflicting economic and political interests would be reconciled through a representative Congress, whose legislation would be subject to presidential veto and judicial review.
