Page 755; Footnote 5 > 5 WINTHROP, MILITARY LAW & PRECEDENTS 799 (“By military government is meant that dominion exercised in war
by a belligerent power over territory of the enemy invaded and occupied by him and over the inhabitants thereof.
By most writers, prior to the appearance of the dissenting opinion of Chase, C.J., in Ex parte Milligan, this species
of government was designated in general terms as ‘martial law,’ and thus was confused with or not properly
distinguished from the martial law proper exerted at home under circumstances of emergency, and yet to be
considered.”); Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 141-42 (1866) (Chase, C.J., separate opinion) (“There are under the
Constitution three kinds of military jurisdiction: one to be exercised both in peace and war; another to be exercised
in time of foreign war without the boundaries of the United States, or in time of rebellion and civil war within states
or districts occupied by rebels treated as belligerents; and a third to be exercised in time of invasion or insurrection
within the limits of the United States, or during rebellion within the limits of states maintaining adhesion to the
National Government, when the public danger requires its exercise. The first of these may be called jurisdiction
under MILITARY LAW, and is found in acts of Congress prescribing rules and articles of war, or otherwise
providing for the government of the national forces; the second may be distinguished as MILITARY
GOVERNMENT, superseding, as far as may be deemed expedient, the local law, and exercised by the military
commander under the direction of the President, with the express or implied sanction of Congress; while the third
may be denominated MARTIAL LAW PROPER, and is called into action by Congress, or temporarily, when the
action of Congress cannot be invited, and in the case of justifying or excusing peril, by the President, in times of insurrection or invasion, or of civil or foreign war, within districts or localities where ordinary law no longer
adequately secures public safety and private rights.”).<
Page 755; Footnote 5 > 5 WINTHROP, MILITARY LAW & PRECEDENTS 799 (“By military government is meant that dominion exercised in war by a belligerent power over territory of the enemy invaded and occupied by him and over the inhabitants thereof. By most writers, prior to the appearance of the dissenting opinion of Chase, C.J., in Ex parte Milligan, this species of government was designated in general terms as ‘martial law,’ and thus was confused with or not properly distinguished from the martial law proper exerted at home under circumstances of emergency, and yet to be considered.”); Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, 141-42 (1866) (Chase, C.J., separate opinion) (“There are under the Constitution three kinds of military jurisdiction: one to be exercised both in peace and war; another to be exercised in time of foreign war without the boundaries of the United States, or in time of rebellion and civil war within states or districts occupied by rebels treated as belligerents; and a third to be exercised in time of invasion or insurrection within the limits of the United States, or during rebellion within the limits of states maintaining adhesion to the National Government, when the public danger requires its exercise. The first of these may be called jurisdiction under MILITARY LAW, and is found in acts of Congress prescribing rules and articles of war, or otherwise providing for the government of the national forces; the second may be distinguished as MILITARY GOVERNMENT, superseding, as far as may be deemed expedient, the local law, and exercised by the military commander under the direction of the President, with the express or implied sanction of Congress; while the third may be denominated MARTIAL LAW PROPER, and is called into action by Congress, or temporarily, when the action of Congress cannot be invited, and in the case of justifying or excusing peril, by the President, in times of insurrection or invasion, or of civil or foreign war, within districts or localities where ordinary law no longer adequately secures public safety and private rights.”).<