Or the South to stay in the Union when the North was violating the fugitive slave part of the Constitution, eh?
As Daniel Webster said:
If the South were to violate any part of the Constitution intentionally and systematically, and persist in so doing from year to year, and no remedy could be had, would the North be any longer bound by the rest of it; and if the North were deliberately, habitually and of fixed purpose to disregard one part of it, would the South be bound any longer to observe its other obligations?... How absurd is it to suppose that when different parties enter into a compact for certain purposes, either can disregard any one provision and expect nevertheless the other to observe the rest?... A bargain cannot be broken on one side and still bind the other.
So then you agree that President Buchanan was in the right to try and send supplies to Sumter? Does that extend to President Lincoln's actions as well?