In chapter XXII of the Squatter and the Don, Maria Amparo Ruiz de Burton reveals the purpose of her book: to instruct the readers. Indeed, it is stated at the beginning of this chapter that ” Biographies are intended, or should be, admonitory; to teach men by the example of the one helps up to view – be this is an example to followed or to be avoided “. While this book cannot be considered strictly as a biography because it is merely a fiction, it nonetheless contains several historical facts and has been largely inspired by the life of the author. It is therefore fair to admit that this book can be considered as a fictional biography. As a biography, its main purpose is not to entertain but to deliver lessons. If throughout the book several lessons are shared with the reader, the end of Squatter and Don reveals the real antagonist of the story and therefore its main “Moral”. On the one hand, if, after a long period of uncertainty, the Alamares and the Darrels are united by the marriage of their respective children, thus showing the possibility of building a nation despite the diversity of races. On the other hand, both families are victims of the selfishness and voracity of the managers of the Central Railroad Company. The hope of building a sustainable nation that includes and considers equally all these citizens regardless of their social or racial origin (at least the Spanish and Anglo-Saxons) is demolished by immorality. That is why I consider this book as a real plea urging the Americans to act ethically in all aspects of their lives in order to build a just society. As the author shows, this task is particularly incumbent on the powerful, but it is also a guiding principle in the lives of ordinary citizens.

To demonstrate my point, I will use the example of the “Business”, which is crucial to the plot of the novel. The author throughout the book but especially in the second part of the story develops a crucial division between “wild capitalism” and “moral capitalism”. The wild capitalism is represented mainly by Gasbang, its lawyer Roper, and the managers of the Central Railroad Company. The moral capitalism is represented by George, the Don and Clarence. The distinction between “wild” capitalism and “moral” capitalism is not the legality of actions but their ethical approach. In fact, all illegal actions are presented as immoral. The immorality of corruption is first represented by Roper, a corrupt lawyer. His immorality is first presented by his lack of humanity when he says: “If I can make any money by kicking him out of his house, don’t you suppose I’d do it”. The second element characterizing his immorality is his corrupt nature when he says: “you have the law, the equity, the money and the talent but I have the judge” (Chapter XXX, p.280). The immorality of corruption is also illustrated in chapter XXXI, when the author, referring to the conspiracy of the railway barons, states that “The aid was refused. The monopoly triumphed, bringing poverty and distress where peace might have been”. Nevertheless, even if Business is conducted legally, it can also be immoral according to the author. In fact, the actions of squatters are, at least at the beginning of the novel, totally legal because they use unfair laws as an opportunity to make money. However, their actions are guided by bad faith and hurt honest people, namely the Don’s family. Worse still, they harm the global economy and all Californians, as illustrated in Chapter 5, because their activities are not adapted to the country, which is a “gazing country” and not a country adapted to crops. Therefore, this “wild” capitalism is mainly driven by vanity, i.e. an action guided by a person’s self-satisfaction without taking into account the suffering involved by his activity. The actors of this immoral capitalism intentionally hurt people in order to improve their own satisfaction. On the other hand, moral capitalism is represented by George or Clarence who are true entrepreneurs, taking risks to make money. It is interesting to show that the family is omnipresent in the strategy employed by the two characters, which implies that a moral form of capitalism must lead to the prosperity and growth of the whole society and not of certain individuals. By contrasting these two forms of capitalism, the author shows the need to introduce morality into this new economic system. She shows that if morality is forgotten, it will lead to the improvement of the majority and the domination of a few powerful businessmen.

This is why Morality is the main link between capitalism, the nation, the people, the law, the democracy and love, at least in this novel.