But, sir, I cannot believe that this is our condition.  I cannot believe that these States have ever been out of the Union, or that they are now out of the Union.  I cannot believe that they ever have been, or are now, in any sense a separate Power.  If they were, sir, how and when did they become so?  They were once States of this Union—­that every one concedes; bound to the Union and made members of the Union by the Constitution of the United States.  If they ever went out of the Union it was at some specific time and by some specific act.  I regret that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Stevens) is not now in his seat.  I should have been glad to ask him by what specific act, and at what precise time, any one of those States took itself out of the American Union.  Was it by the ordinance of secession?  I think we all agree that an ordinance of secession passed by any State of this Union is simply a nullity, because it encounters in its practical operation the Constitution of the United States, which is the supreme law of the land.  It could have no legal, actual force or validity.  It could not operate to effect any actual change in the relations of the State adopting it to the national Government, still less to accomplish the removal of that State from the sovereign jurisdiction of the Constitution of the United States.

Well, sir, did the resolutions of the States, the declarations of their officials, the speeches of members of their Legislatures, or the utterances of their press accomplish the result?  Certainly not.  They could not possibly work any change whatever in the relations of these States to the General Government.  All their ordinances and all their resolutions were simply declarations of a purpose to secede.  Their secession, if it ever took place, certainly could not date from the time when their intention to secede was first announced.  After declaring that intention, they proceeded to carry it into effect.  How?  By war.  By sustaining their purpose by arms against the force which the United States brought to bear against it.  Did they sustain it?  Were their arms victorious?  If they were, then their secession was an accomplished fact.  If not, it was nothing more than an abortive attempt—­a purpose unfulfilled.  This, then, is simply a question of fact, and we all know what the fact is.  They did not succeed.  They failed to maintain their ground by force of arms—­in other words, they failed to secede.

But the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Stevens) insists that they did secede, and that this fact is not in the least affected by the other fact that the Constitution forbids secession.  He says that the law forbids murder, but that murders are nevertheless committed.  But there is no analogy between the two cases.  If secession had been accomplished, if these States had gone out, and overcome the armies that tried to prevent their going out, then the prohibition of the Constitution could not have altered the fact.