[2] At the time period, Haskell was an industrial boarding school, where students learned domestic skills and were punished if they spoke their native tongue.

[13] Life on the reservation was fairly typical of a rural farming environment, as was described by John Henry Hauberg, Sr. an attorney, businessman and noted local historian from Rock Island, Illinois.

Hauberg had a relationship with Jesse KaKaQue for a number of years, taking photographs and exchanging correspondence from 1914 to 1918, which is housed in the Special Collections Department at Augustana College.

A false sense of Native American prosperity based on glowing reports and images of fancily costumed Indians, caused many to reject the dire need that developed for aid.

[21][22] Throughout the early decades of the 20th century, the Tribal Advisory Board was dominated by progressive, Christianized farmers, who validated agency decisions and were often not representative of the much larger conservative elements on the reservation.

In the early part of the 1930s the conservative faction organized as a reform movement, adopted a constitution, and reorganized the Tribal Advisory Council to an elected Business Committee.

[23] Minnie first served as an appointed adviser beginning in 1933 but was elected to a lifetime position on the board of conciliators, a group composed of elder statesmen who had earned tribal respect.

Though they desired an end of allotment and a return of some 50,000 acres of their land,[25] they did not want an imposed self-government styled on the model of the US constitution to be forced upon them.

[25] Their experience with their local superintendent, who had called off-reservation meetings with progressive factions on two occasions to oust the elected conservative Business Committee, did little to inspire confidence in the New Deal Program.

[28] During the period from the 1940s to the 1960s, in which the Indian termination policy was enforced the Potawatomi continued to struggle for their own autonomy, and their own ability to deal with their affairs.

[29] On January 5, 1939, when House Resolution 3048 and Senate Bill 372 were introduced, lawmakers were advised that the proposal was supported by the Indian tribes.

[32] On 1 August 1953, the US Congress passed House Concurrent Resolution 108 which called for the immediate termination of the Flathead, Klamath, Menominee, Potawatomi, and Turtle Mountain Chippewa, as well as all tribes in the states of California, New York, Florida, and Texas.

Its purpose was to settle for all time any outstanding grievances or claims the tribes might have against the U.S. for treaty breaches, unauthorized taking of land, dishonorable or unfair dealings, or inadequate compensation.

Up until that time, many more progressive tribal members had moved off the reservation and increasingly worked to assimilate into the larger society, but with the potential for sharing in damages, those elements began reclaiming their Potawatomi roots.

[40] Evans recommended that the Potawatomi hire Stone McClure Webb Johnson Oman firm from Topeka, Kansas to assist in preparing their claim.

For example, in one case, at issue was the amount paid to the Potawatomi for lands ceded west of the Mississippi in the removal first to Iowa and later to Kansas.

16 July 1958 the appellate court ruled that the eastern group could not intervene, as the treaty for which damages were sought required the tribe to move west.

[58] In part, Minnie's group was spurred by the award on the first Indian Claims case, which stated that the fund was to make reparations for "descendants of the Nation as it existed in the Treaty of 1846."

The tribal council, elected under the rules of the 1961 constitution, declared that those who should share in the judgment were those who were listed as members of the Prairie Band as of midnight 1 December 1960.

The traditionalists strongly opposed this interpretation, believing instead that the only members entitled to share in the judgement were those who were identifiable as descendants of those Potawatomi who constituted the Nation in 1846.

[59] A second action filed in 1964 against the Secretary of the Interior and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs was also unsuccessful in limiting those who participated in the settlement to descendants of tribal members in 1846.