Problem with this theory is that Lincoln had no say in their placement. You don't list dates as to when these companies were sent, but whenever it was it had to have been before Lincoln was sworn in as president because the Augusta Arsenal was seized on January 24 and the Little Rock Arsenal on February 8. Had there been a conflict, it would have been Buchanan's spark to deal with, not Lincoln's. There were some in the South who advocated taking Fort Sumter BEFORE Lincoln's inauguration so that he COULDN'T use that a justification to use force, since it wouldn't have happened while he was in office.
The reason those arsenal's surrendered without a fight is that a fight would have been bloodshed for no purpose in the complete absence of instructions from Washington. No relief could possibly have come to Augusta or Little Rock because they would have had to come overland through hostile territory. Logistically it simply wasn't possible to gather and organize an effective force quickly enough. Forts Sumter and Pickens could be defended by small forces and resupplied/reinforced from the sea, so relief was possible if properly executed.
"This is what I believe was happening with the Arsenal at Charleston. Why no help or even instruction were forthcoming to give the commander guidence. And why I believe that the commander surrendered the arsenal, resigned his commission and joined the Confederacy once he realized what was going on. That he had been hung out on a limb by Lincoln."
How could Humphrey have been "hung out on a limb by Lincoln?" The Charleston Arsenal surrendered on December 28, 1860, over two months before Lincoln took office. Humphrey surrendered because his force of 14 was surrounded by a force of over 200 and resistance was pointless.