1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
rodikova [14]
3 years ago
6

The agricultural economy in Texas and the South was in ruins following the Civil War. Why were the farmers and planters unable t

o produce as much as they had before the war?
A.
The many battles in the Texas had destroyed crops.
B.
The North stopped importing produce from the South.
C.
There were no slaves to do the work.
D.
Southerners were fined for causing the Civil War.
History
1 answer:
ololo11 [35]3 years ago
6 0
I believe that the correct answer is C. Even during the war the South was enraged by the The Emancipation Proclamation with its promise of freedom for their slaves, because the slaves were their primary work force, and as such represented their labor source. It's true, the South was very rich, but it was primarily tied up in the slave economy. When there was no slaves to work, the economy suffered.
You might be interested in
The invention of the cotton gin dramatically changed the agriculture of the:
melamori03 [73]
Hi there!

The cotton gin changed the agriculture of the South.

Brady
6 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
By creating monopolies and establishing trusts, industrial leaders of the late 1800s
kupik [55]

The correct answer is C.

A monopoly is a market structure where a single firm serves the whole demand of a specific good or service. It does not face competitors, therefore, such firm has absolute market power to decide the price charged for its products. So, the monopoly is able to charge a higher price than in a perfect competition scenario and will earn much larger profits.

The accumumlation of such vast amounts by the industrial leaders, gave rise to the emergence of the Progressive movement in the US. It took place between the 1880s and the 1920s with the aim of eliminating negative consequences of the industrialization process in the US and monopolies were targeted. Monopolies enriched their owners by preventing competition and they were harmful for consumers because these were forced to buy worse quality products at higher prices. This is the origin of antitrust regulations and of the interference of public powers in the regulation of private businesses.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
13.
kramer

The answer is

#3 The patricians wanted to keep all of the power in government.

- Raity

8 0
4 years ago
Why did native Americans and French have to deal with each other on equal terms
bulgar [2K]

The main reason is that they did not try to change the Natives. They also did not compete with the Natives for land. When the French first came to the Americas in the 1530s and 1540s to engage in seasonal fur trading, they immediately established strong trading ties with the local Natives they found there. The Natives already dealt extensively in furs.

The French quickly discovered they could go back to France in the winter months with ships laden with furs they had purchased from the Natives with European wares, such as metal cooking pots, weapons, horses, and other goods not accessible to the Natives at that time. The Natives also accompanied the French on hunting parties and showed them where the good fur animals could be found. The French made it a point to learn the Native languages and ways, and established good relations that were based on equality with all of the tribes in the area.

The French began to stay year-round in the early 1600s, establishing their first permanent settlement at Quebec in 1608, one year after the English founded Jamestown in Virginia. They did not displace any Natives in the establishment of their settlement and continued to work closely with them in the fur trade. They respected Native territories, their ways, and treated them as the human beings they were. The Natives, in turn, treated the French as trusted friends. More intermarriages took place between French settlers and Native Americans than with any other European group.

This close alliance, which was based on mutual respect and good treatment from both sides, led the Natives to side with the French in their conflicts with the English settlers that came later in the 1600s and into the mid-1700s. Relations between the Natives and the English were not nearly as good.

The English treated the Natives as inferior, believed they stood in the way of their God-given right to the land in America and tried to subject the Natives to their laws as they established their colonies. The Spanish didn’t have any better relations with the Natives, as they tried to enslave them when they first came to America, and later established missions where they tried to force them to convert from their traditional religions to Catholicism. The Natives did not appreciate any of this.

The key to the friendly relations the French enjoyed with the Natives was all in the way they treated them when they first encountered them, and how they continued to treat them afterward. As long as the French maintained settlements in America, they enjoyed excellent relations with each other. For those who have early American French ancestry, or French settler ancestors who married Native Americans, the vast majority of those records can be found in the provincial archives of Quebec (some records there might lead back to France if the settler returned there with his Native American bride).

These records provide a fascinating look at relations between Natives and Europeans and show just how different things could have been if all the European people who came to America had been as progressive in their treatment of the Natives as the French were.

7 0
3 years ago
Which of these was one of President Truman's concerns during the Korean War?
Sedaia [141]
Truman was most concerned with the newly communistic country of China joining the war effort. The US and United Nations could handle North Korea and were able to push back forces out of South Korea. China entering meant more men, more money, and more arms. It also could eventually lead to an escalation of warring powers coming into the war. China did enter the war which led to an armistice and agreement to keep Korea split at the 38th parallel. 
7 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • An Indian merchant meets with a Roman trader and gives him jewels and spices. In exchange for those items, the Roman gives him t
    13·2 answers
  • Explain how Chinese philosophies presented a different version of an ideal ruler
    14·1 answer
  • What effect did mining have on the West?
    13·1 answer
  • Can someone please please answer the ones you know with explanation ASAP?!!
    15·1 answer
  • Explain the origins and development of the Civil Rights movement from 1945 to 1963. What started a push for Civil Rights during
    13·2 answers
  • Which invention had the GREATEST impact on the southern economy in the early 1800's?
    6·2 answers
  • Three reasons Africans was chosen as slaves?
    15·1 answer
  • What is one way the government impacts your life?
    11·2 answers
  • In one paragraph (5-6 sentences) give your opinion as to which factors had the biggest impact on ending U.S. involvement in Viet
    15·1 answer
  • What was the "Dust Bowl" and what caused it?
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!