Why not give the newspapers the benefit of the doubt? Sumter wasn't attacked until a week later, and Northerners still weren't sure how to react to secession. That went for the leaders, but especially for the man in the street.
After the attack, average Northerners were much more decided in their opinion and determined to fight back. In South Carolina, by contrast, passions were running high in the weeks -- and perhaps even months -- before the war.
You mean the newspaper that said the following (as I posted above):
No man, anywhere in the North, proposes for a moment to interfere with Slavery in any Southern State. No man proposes to exclude Slavery by Congressional action from any Territory. No man proposes to interfere in any way with the execution of the Fugitive Slave law ...
I'm sorry. I can't resist skewering the Times.
And from one of my earlier quotes from the Times on another thread:
In our judgment, the [Lincoln] inaugural cannot fail to exert a very happy influence on public sentiment throughout the country.
And from the Times naval expertise (posted above):
No matter how brave or skillful the Southern troops may be, they will be under a fire which will render the entire stoppage of relief to Fort Sumpter [sic] nearly impossible.
The Times also put forth a lot of verbiage and articles claiming that the objective of the ships and troop transports being sent south was Texas. I don't know whether this was false info being slipped to the paper by the Administration to throw off the Charlestonians or just a faulty (intentional or otherwise) interpretation by the Times.
Here is blurb they published about Texas on April 11th:
The fact is well known also, that a large portion of the Texan population, if not a majority, is loyal to the Union; and that it has been overpowered by the organized band of outlaws, known under the title of the Knights of the Golden Circle.
The fact seems to be lost sight of, is that the Federal Government is authorized and bound to "repel invasion" of the States, even when not called upon by the local Legislature or the Governors. Texas has been invaded by Indian tribes, and is threatened by lawless bands from Mexicans. Here, then, is legitimate ground for interference, in addition to the ordinary right of the Executive to send troops to any part of the Union.
By a vote of more than three to one, Texans approved the secession ordinance. The low totals against secession matched the vote for the pro-Union party in the 1860 presidential election.
The Knights of the Golden Circle overpowered the state? This seems to have escaped the notice of most historians. However, I did learn something of interest when researching the Knights. Apparently, a mob of Knights (and possibly some Confederate “Rangers”) attacked and destroyed the Alamo Express newspaper in May 1861. The Alamo Express was a Union paper. This is only the second mob action that I am aware of that destroyed a Southern newspaper.
Finally, the fact that the Feds had done a poor job at protecting Texas from invasion was one of the reasons why Texas seceded in the first place. How ironic that the Times thought the Feds could use Indian and Mexican invasions as a pretext to invade Texas.