"Mr. Epperson provided some information concerning the cites used by Davis in his book The Long Surrender. The issue was the quote attributed to CJ Chase to the effect that "secession is not rebellion...."
I looked at the 1900 VBA article and it, so far as I can tell, does not mention that quote. So where it came from remains a mystery.
But, I am not sure I would agree that the sentiment (secession is not rebellion) would not be that of Chase. He, IMO, carefully distinguished betwen secession and "levying war." Secession was not the same thing as levying war. I am not sure when he formulated his view that the acts of secession were null and void (the famous "sentence" of Tx. vs. White), but assuming he had that view when the quote was made (if it was made), the quote is understandable. If secession is Constitutionally impossible, then it would be of no effect and bringing criminal charges based on that alone would be problematic.
My opinion is, I think, aided by Chase's letter to Greeley condemning an editorial which, IIRC, argued that treason had not been committed or that, if committed, it should not be punished. Chase writes to the effect "Where have you been? Can it be denied that Confederates levied war against the US and that they had a duty of allegiance to the US? Of course not! Thus, the Constitutional requirements for treason have been met--not by the attempted secession, but from the war which followed."
IOW, Chase seemed to separate the act of secession from the acts of war which followed. The latter he believed to be clearly treason, the former, he thought to be not quite so clear. I would welcome any comments on my reading of the events and Chase's view of the law. I am not interested in the usual personal attacks from the usual suspect."
Walt
Thanks for sharing that original research on the origin of the Chase quote from Epperson. How long do you think you'll have to wait for 4CJ to acknowlege that his impeccable source on the matter [Burke Davis] is compromised?