No. The majority of people in the Southern Colonies were small farmers who did not own slaves and people who did not own land at all. The earliest plantation owners were in the minority and were mostly British in origin. Many white people were just as poor as the black slaves and many had to hire themselves out to do work for the wealthy land owners.
true.
Many slaves in the south worked on large plantations
yes
Small and large that had one slave was about 11%- most had paid off what their owners had paid for them. The "company store" towns had more in worse condition than the slaves in the south.
Slaves weren't needed. The reasons slaves were used in the south they had large plantations that needed people to work, plant, pick cotton, and do other things. The economy between the south and the north was totally different.
true.
maybe
A large majority of people did not own slaves. Most slave owners had few slaves.
The South worried since the number of representative in the House of Representative is chosen by the size of the population per state and since slaves made a large proportion of the population in the South compared to the Whites... That without the slaves being included in the population of the Southern states they would have a much smaller number of representatives in the Congress.
Many slaves in the south worked on large plantations
The large farms in the south were called plantations. Many had slaves working on them.
The population of South Dakota's At-large congressional district is 754,854.
because sc became a slaved state derfore black people had to work for whites and there were more black people than white
South
yes
The majority of Australia's population lives along the east and south east coastal areas, with a few pockets like the south west of Western Australia. The vast majority of the Australian continent is arid to semi-arid, there is very little suface water, low rainfall and it will not support large urban populations.
A large population lives in Hawaii and California.