No. If YOU make an unsupported claim, it's up to you to provide documentation. In this case I've seen the secondhand evidence, what I want is primary evidence that the states considered secession treason, and the secondhand account of one federal representative is not overwhelming proof of your position.
If you wish to continue your position that a single, unsubstantiated account validates your position, then I readily adopt it to prove that secession was legal.
Haynes refers to it in his debate as such.
It is very hard to remain a viable national Party when you are considered a bunch of traitors.