POPULATION - Early attempts at establishing permanent settlements were failures. In 1598, a trading post was established on Sable Island, off the coast of Acadia, but was unsuccessful. In 1600, a trading post was established at Tadoussac, but only five settlers survived the winter. In 1604, a settlement was founded at Île-Saint-Croix on Baie François (Bay of Fundy) which was moved to Port-Royal in 1605, only to be abandoned in 1607, reestablished in 1610, and destroyed in 1613, after which settlers moved to other nearby locations.
In 1608, sponsored by Henry IV of France, Samuel de Champlain founded Quebec with six families totalling 28 people, the second successful French settlement in what is now Canada. Colonization was slow and difficult. Many settlers died early, because of harsh weather and diseases. In 1630, there were only 100 colonists living in the settlement, but, by 1640, there were 359. The 1666 census of New France was conducted by France's intendant, Jean Talon, in the winter of 1665-1666. It showed a population of 3215 habitants in New France
GOVERNMENT -
In the 1650s, Montreal still had only a few dozen settlers and a severely underpopulated New France almost fell completely to the Iroquois attempts to drive out the French. In 1660, settler Adam Dollard des Ormeaux led a Canadian and Huron militia against a much larger Iroquois force; none of the Canadians survived, but they succeeded in turning back the Iroquois invasion. In 1663, New France finally became more secure when Louis XIV made it a province of France. In 1665, he sent a French garrison, the Carignan-Salières Regiment, to Quebec. The government of the colony was reformed along the lines of the government of France, with the Governor General and Intendant subordinate to the Minister of the Marine in France. In 1665, Jean Talon was sent by Minister of the Marine Jean-Baptiste Colbert to New France as the first Intendant. These reforms limited the power of the Bishop of Quebec, who had held the greatest amount of power after the death of Champlain.
ECONOMY - -
This sparsely-settled northern area of French Louisiana, criss-crossed by the Mississippi and its affluents, was primarily devoted to cereals. The very few French farmers lived in villages . They cultivated the land with paid laborers, producing mostly corn and wheat. The fields were cleared with ploughs. They raised horses, cows and pigs, and also grew a little tobacco, hemp, flax and grapes (though most wine was still imported from France). Agriculture was at the mercy of the rough climate and periodic floods of the Mississippi.
The trading posts in the Illinois Country concentrated mostly on the fur trade. Placed at strategic points, they were modestly fortified. Only a few were made out of stone (Fort de Chartres, Fort Niagara). Like their American "mountain man" counterparts, the " coureurs des bois " exchanged beaverskin or deer pelts for weapons, cloth or shoddy goods, because the local economy was based on barter. The skins and fur are later sold in the forts and cities of New France. The Illinois Country also produced salt and lead and provided New Orleans with game.
THE enconomy was based on slave-owning plantations. The owners generally had their main residence in New Orleans and entrusted the supervision of the fields to a treasurer. The crops were varied and adapted to the climate and terrain. Part of the production was intended for use by Louisianans (corn, vegetables, rice, livestock), the rest being exported to France (especially TOBACCO AND INDIGO) .
2007-03-25 08:29:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by shitstainz 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
usa is a social democracy, do not have confidence me seem it up. There exists no organic capitalist unfastened marketplace economic device immediately. All international locations have some variety of differentiated taxation and social classes. Australia is a social democracy in basic terms like the U.S. The U.S. has been a social democracy formally ever on the grounds that FDR and the hot deal. people who call the plans of Obama socialist or communist are deceptive, he's a social democrat. Republicans are additionally social democrats, that's except they belong to the some distance-appropriate libertarian area of the occasion: that desire a flat tax on all earnings and a constrained gov't. devoid of social centers. which potential the tea occasion applicants this autumn choose to do away with Social protection, Welfare, Public guidance, Medicare, Widow pensions etc etc. i've got on no account heard of combination economic device. yet you're in all possibility searching for social democracy or democratic socialism(even nevertheless it is a few thing else altogether).
2016-10-19 21:12:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋