[eno_]

To be fair, N-S didn't argue a constitutional case. He said that firing on Sumter was treason. There is a bit of circularity in that as well: If a state secedes, it has to enforce a border. At some point that will mean the use of force.

[Non-Sequitur]

He said that firing on Sumter was treason.

I said that firing on Sumter was part of the souther rebellion. I've never, to my knowledge, used the word treason. Get it right, please.

If a state secedes, it has to enforce a border. At some point that will mean the use of force.

And if the confederacy chose force as their policy, then why should they be surprised when the Union responded in kind?