The main difference is that most of the British 13 colonies were "settlements," while the French and Spanish holdings were really "colonies."
"New France" was based on the trade in furs, sugar, and other commodities, and had less than 100,000 people in total. The people that came over were "careerists" in the above trade, not people who planned to settle for a long time.
Similarly, most of the Spanish colonies were founded and based on the gold trade (Mexico and Peru). This was less true of Buenos Aires, which was arguably the most successful of the Spanish colonies. That is, it was a real settlement based on the production of foodstuffs such as grain and cattle.
On the other hand, most of the British colonies were founded by true settlers, who planned to live and work in (rather than plunder) the Americas. Moreover, they were mostly led by religious, or other idealists, who had a vested interest in seeing the settlements succeed. …show more content…
With one million inhabitants, there were almost 20 times more English colonists than the 55,000 French colonists. The colony of Massachusetts alone had three times the population of all New France. The rapid increase in the population was due to the economic attractiveness of these colonies. The poor could find work or a plot of land to settle on. The rich could grow richer through trade or by cultivating large plantations. The Thirteen Colonies were also a haven for religious groups who had fled their homeland to escape persecution: English Puritans and Quakers, German Mennonites and Marovians, and even French