Daily Cincinnati Republican

HAMER-ITES AND BROUGH-ITES.—The Enquirer of Monday gives two and a half columns in description of a political set-to between the Hamerites and the Broughites, at a meeting held in Georgetown, Brown county, on Saturday last. It would seem from this account there was a large meeting—something like a thousand persons present—and that Gen. McDowell, Mr. Patterson and Mr. Hamer took the stump for the democracy, while Mr. Charles Brough, Mr. Elwood Fisher, and Col. Downey Utter for loco focoism. As Mr. Brough tells the story, the three latter pretty much used up their opponents even on their "own dunghill." As to this, however, we readily confess, (that is, if the editor of the Enquirer—himself one of the champions—give anything like a fair synopsis of the argument, we care not a straw whether Roderigo killed Iago, or Iago Roderigo. It might have been a perfect Kilkenny affair for all us. What we have to say, however, is just this—that the editor of the Enquirer shall be made to back out, in double quick time, from the position which he unwittingly, no doubt, represents himself to have assumed in this debate, or there will be left but the name of loco focoism in Hamilton county after October next.

We are going into no argument at this early day—but the Enquirer of Monday shall be preserved as carefully as may be, every word and syllable. All that we could not ask is, that every democratic citizen of Cincinnati—every intelligent man that knows and feels the importance to Ohio of a sound mixed currency of paper and the metals—shall take up and read this loco foco organ's two and a half columns of argument. Note carefully the whole of that paragraph commencing at the bottom of the first column and continuing half down the second. See the editor and orator making use of the old Whig argument and showing conclusively, that all proportionate personal liability of stockholders is (to use his own language) "a ridiculous farce,"—Hear him contending, that naught else will answer but that plan which makes the stockholder of a hundred dollars liable, in the last resort, for the whole debt of the corporation to the last farthing! The Enquirer is thanked for this plain avowal of a policy which he has hitherto so carefully concealed from the democracy of this county.

We are not to be understood as supposing, that there is anything wonderful in the editor's present argument in itself. Far from it. It is the very same which was made over, and over, and over again, against proportionate liabilities, by the Whigs of Cincinnati during last fall's canvass. It's only pleasant to have it from the Enquirer's own pen, that this kind of responsibility is "IMPRACTICABLE AND RIDICULOUS"—to have it from the editor's own lips, that no plan will suit the loco foco party but full personal liability—that kind of responsibility which makes the owner of a single share of stock liable to the whole of his fortune, be it an hundred thousand.

Upon this issue, then, we go before the people. The farmers, the mechanics, the merchants, the manufacturers of Hamilton county must decide in October, whether such issue does not simply amount to Bank or no Bank? Whether such doctrine does not shut out all hope of a sound banking system in Ohio.