Because of the differences in political, social, and economic institutions established during the initial period of colonization, why were the British colonies in North America better suited for self–government than their Spanish counterparts?

The early British (and Dutch, too) colonies were better suited for self-government because they were mostly comprised of proprietary (owned by businesses or individuals; such as New Amsterdam, later New York) colonies and religious colonies, peopled by Europeans seeking a place to practice to their religious beliefs and customs without monarchial interference (e.g., Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, or Maryland). The third type of colony in the "New World" was the royal colony. These colonies were under direct supervision and governance of a European monarchy. The Spanish colonies were royal colonies and therefore were not granted self-governance. In the case of religious colonies, the British crown was happy to be free of those who did not conform to the religious dictates of the crown. In the case of proprietary colonies, as long as they made money for the owner individual or business, they were more or less able to govern themselves. Proprietary colonies were often more likely to be tolerant and inclusive—commerce and profit were the primary concerns.