How did the treaty of Paris affect the american Indian's living on the land Britain claimed from France?

Answers

Answer 1
Answer:

The treaty affected this land due to the fact that the British were unable to get the Indians to stop settling on the land.

What was the treaty of Paris?

The tretay of Paris was the agreement that led to the end of the French Indian war. It led to the end of the war that the British had with the French.

In this treaty, the French people had to give up on all the lands that they had acquired in the Northern part of the America.

Read more on the treaty of Paris here:

brainly.com/question/756759

Answer 2
Answer:

Answer:

A

Explanation:

The British government could not prevent settlement of American Indian lands.


Related Questions

Do you think the consequences of imperialism/colonialism are more positive or negative?
Major industries in the early 1900s were food products, textiles, iron and steel, and lumber.
Why did the United States get involved in World War I (describe at least 3 reasons).
What were the social effects of the black death?
What was the judiciary act of 1801?

Which of the following resulted from the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)?

Answers

  Out of all the options presented above the one that represents the result from the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement is answer choice D) an increase in the flow of goods between the United States and Mexico. It was signed into law by President Clinton and as a result, there was an increase of maquiladoras in Mexico where 90% of goods produced there were shipped directly to the US. 


Answer:

The growth of Mexico's manufacturing industry

Explanation:

Which of the following were criticisms of Levittowns? Check all of the boxes that apply. Homes were constructed cheaply. Homes were too similar to one another. Homes were expensive and too unique. The communities were overplanned and lacked character.

Answers

The criticism of Levittowns were that:

  • Homes were constructed cheaply.
  • Homes were too similar to one another.
  • The communities were over planned and lacked character.

What were Levittowns?

These were considered the first suburbs where several houses would be built close to each other with the same design thereby lowering construction costs.

People claimed these houses were cheaply built and prone to damage and also that the communities were overplanned in that they looked too urban.

In conclusion, options A, B, and D are correct.

Find out more on Levittowns at brainly.com/question/173381.

I think that it would be,

Homes were constructed cheaply: They were shabby because people didn't want to spend that much money on them. (I think)

Homes were too similar and too unique: They were criticized for being so lookalike and not unique.

(The last one might be true, but I'm not completely sure)

What do economists mean when they use the word "scarcity?"

Answers

Answer:

Scarcity means "little of"

Explanation:

Scarcity means "little of" (Example food)

There was a scarcity of food in the town.

Since economics is dealing with money the word will most likely be used in the context of money.

Answer:

the demand for something greater than what's available scarcity limits the options available for consumers

Explanation:

gap between whats available the of limited resources and the theoretical needs of people for such resource

In ancient rome were roman women taught to read and write?

Answers

Answer:

The Romans believed in the education of women…

Basic skills of reading and writing were taught to most girls in the Roman upper and middle classes, while some families went further and employed private tutors to teach their daughters more advanced grammar or Greek.

Which of the following describes the impact of job specialization on neolithic societies

Answers

Neolithic societies developed more divers goods and products of the following describes the impact of job specialization on Neolithic societies, is the correct answer.

why was national attention drawn to william jennings bryan and clarence darrow in the scopes trial of 1925

Answers

Why was national attention drawn to William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow in the scopes trial of 1925.
The case represented the conflict between modern science and religion. Scopes was found guilty and fined $100 (almost $1,300 in today's money).
During the William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow's trial ruled that Tennessee teachers could not teach any theories that disputed Christianity. During the period, a teacher was jailed for teaching John T. Scope. The law remained on the docket for thirty years. Science and religion were not evolving together.