Answer:
To profit and trade.
Explanation:
For a variety of reasons, the British desired an empire. To begin with, the discovery of the New World allowed for the accumulation of wealth. Metals and minerals abound in the Americas, and the English, then British, were keen to take use of them. The large open regions present in the Americas also allowed for expansion. This might be utilized to relieve land strain at home, be farmed for items needed in Britain, and serve as a trading post on the route to the Far East, hopefully. Trade was a major driving force. The East India Company and the Royal African Company were founded as a result of a lack of profit.
Answer:
Hi there . is it an anime?
<u>Answer</u>:
The common thing between these three types of activities is that they form a production chain giving customers the provision of finished goods or services.
Primary production involves acquirement of raw materials for production like coal, metal, rubber tapping etc.
Secondary production involves manufacturing and assembly process that involves the use of such raw materials.
Tertiary production involves commercial services that support the production and distribution process.
All the processes occur in line with each other, where the working of one is essential for the other.
Así es esta muy bien te lo mereces
Answer:
The decisions in Miranda v. Arizona, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Mapp v. Ohio are very important to defendants in criminal proceedings today because they enlarged defendants' rights in criminal trials and investigations.
Thus, Miranda v. Arizona refers to the fact that those accused of a crime must know their rights prior to being questioned by the police, that is, that everything they say can be used against them and that they have the right to consult a lawyer.
For its part, Gideon v. Wainwright guaranteed the defendants the right to have a lawyer, even when they could not afford it on their own financial means. In this way, a defendant is not left legally unprotected for not being able to afford a lawyer, since it is the state that grants him one for free.
Finally, Mapp v. Ohio prohibits the use of illegitimately obtained evidence in criminal proceedings. Thus, non-compliance with the Fourth Amendment (and the consequent search without a warrant) renders the evidence obtained in this way not admissible in court.
