Replies

Not sure what your point is. It belays the fact that the President of the Confederacy directed Confederate forces to open fire on a Federal Fort. Had ships of the Royal Navy fired on Ft. Sumter, war would have been declared. Japanese bombs drop on Pearl Harbor, war is the result. Fire rockets into Israel and you get a war for your efforts. SOP in the real world. Not a single seceded state made an claim of Constitutional authority to secede. Not one chapter, line or verse from the Constitution was cited in the Ordnances of secession to justify their actions. Finding “Constitutional Authority” to explain secession is, in my opinion, an ex post facto attempt to justify the unjustifiable.

Not sure what your point is. It belays the fact that the President of the Confederacy directed Confederate forces to open fire on a Federal Fort.

No, it doesn't belay anything.

belay verb (used with object), belayed, belaying.
1. Nautical. to fasten (a rope) by winding around a pin or short rod inserted in a holder so that both ends of the rod are clear.
2. Mountain Climbing.
a. to secure (a person) by attaching to one end of a rope.
b. to secure (a rope) by attaching to a person or to an object offering stable support.
3.
a. to cease (an action); stop.
b. to ignore (an announcement, order, etc.): Belay that, the meeting will be at 0900 instead of 0800.
verb (used without object), belayed, belaying.
4. to belay a rope: Belay on that cleat over there.
noun
5. Mountain Climbing. a rock, bush, or other object sturdy enough for a running rope to be passed around it to secure a hold.

The word you're looking for is belie (to show to be false, contradict; to misrepresent to act unworthily according to a standard) and it doesn't belie Ft. Sumpter either — the definition of treason uses the plural them which means that the United States referred therein can only be the several states (Legally there are three possibilities) — therefore it is conceivable to not commit Treason even though violently attacking federal troops.

The term "United States" may be used in any one of several senses. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends, or [3] it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. [Hooven & Allison Co. vs Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)]

Had ships of the Royal Navy fired on Ft. Sumter, war would have been declared. Japanese bombs drop on Pearl Harbor, war is the result. Fire rockets into Israel and you get a war for your efforts. SOP in the real world.

Occupation of a fort by a government that the people of the state no longer consider their own?
Again, Treason is levying War against them [the several states] — it matters jack-shit if congress declared war on them definitionally: it would still fulfill the action.

Not a single seceded state made an claim of Constitutional authority to secede. Not one chapter, line or verse from the Constitution was cited in the Ordnances of secession to justify their actions.

So?

Finding “Constitutional Authority” to explain secession is, in my opinion, an ex post facto attempt to justify the unjustifiable.

Just because someone fails to justify some claim does not make it unjustifiable: see Fermat's Last Theorem.
This is why [traditionally] lawyers were held to be good/respectable — John Adams providing an excellent example when he secured acquittal of the British soldiers who were involved in the Boston Massacre (despite the emotion and chaos of the incident the soldiers still had the right to defend themselves).