Could it be that once a party breaks the terms of a contract, as Washington did, it behooves the other party to remove himself from the transaction.Interesting claim, since all the seceding states (including those which attacked federal installations) did so before Lincoln was sworn in.
That's not true. North Carolina seceded May 20th, 1861. Abraham St. Lincoln was sworn in March 4th, 1861. March comes before May most years.
Lincoln was not the only party to the contract. The contract was between the people and the government. Of, by and for the people. It was broken and has since been trashed. Do you think the present government has overstepped its bounds? What limit do you put on those bounds? If a state in the 1860's felt that the government had overstepped those bounds, broken that contract, how much overstepping is required by you to consider the contract broken?
Is the contract broken now?