Differences Between England And Chesapeake Colonies

Words: 479
Pages: 2

During the 1700’s England and Chesapeake regions both settled largely by people of English origin. England was dealing with problem internally and was “late” to colonize. England’s 1st attempt at colonization fails. Also there are factors of colonization such as Enclosure acts, Primogeniture Laws and Joint-Stock Companies. However, by 1700’s both England and Chesapeake regions had evolved into two distinct societies. These major difference from these regions were reasons for immigrating, economy, and government. One major difference between these regions was reasons for immigrating. England had reasons for emigrating was because of religion and commercial reasons. On the other hand, Chesapeake reasons for emigrating was for commercial and profit reasons. England wanted to immigrate because there was religious …show more content…
England government was revolved around town governments. These legislatures, at an opportune time, had a tendency to be firmly fixing to the Puritan church administration. Then as time continued governments had a tendency to be halfway chosen and incompletely named. This was different from the Chesapeake since their government was House of Burgesses which was the first from of representatives of a self government in 1619. The representatives set up by England to make laws and duty charges however England could veto its legislative demonstrations. This is what made these two regions government significantly different. The upshot of all of this is that England and the Chesapeake had significant differences from each other. These difference determined how they were wealthy and how they traded. In addition, it also showed how they governed themselves in order to become a successful region. Furthermore, New England and the Chesapeake regions both had large settlers moved in by the 1700’s which made the colonies need self sufficient needs in order to become prosperous