You know I have been averse to letting Atlantic flour go to New Orleans merely that they may have the _whitest_ bread possible. Without honoring the motives of the petition, it gives us the fact that there is western flour enough for the New Orleans market. I would therefore discourage Atlantic cargoes to that place. I send you the petition of Thomas Beatty for Samuel Glen, of Londonderry, for permission to load a vessel for Ireland. Mr. Beatty met me in the road in one of my daily rides. I gave his paper a hasty perusal, and, asking time for consideration, I told him I would enclose it to you, who would give the answer. On a more deliberate reading of it, I see nothing to exempt it from the general rules, according to which you will be so good as to dispose of it. The cases from Charleston require consideration, and our regular post gives me, in fact, but one forenoon to answer letters. I will forward them to Mr. Theus by our extra post of the 13th. I salute you with friendship and respect. TO SIMEON THEUS, ESQ. MONTICELLO, September 10, 1808. SIR,--According to the request of Mr. Gallatin's letter, herewith enclosed, I have considered the petitions of Grove, Himely, Everingham, and Ogier & Turner, referred to me by him, and forward you the decisions for your government. They are addressed to yourself directly, to avoid unnecessary delay to the parties, by passing them through him, as regularly they should have been. _Grove's Case._ Although the circular of the 1st of July limited no precise day for the departure of vessels under permits, yet in all such cases, a reasonable time only is to be understood, such as using due diligence, will suffice for the object. Such regulations can never be deemed but as temporary, and especially in times when the political circumstances governing them are liable to daily change. The time between the receipt at Charleston, of the circulars of July 1st and August 1st, was from the 19th or 20th of July to the 16th of August,--twenty-seven days; and within this time Mr. Grove states explicitly that he had prepared and cleared out the ship Pierce Manning, for the Havanna, and that she would have sailed before the 16th of August but for adverse winds. Considering, therefore, that the limitation of departure to the 15th of August was not known at Charleston till the 16th, so that not a moment's warning was given of it there, I think that, satisfactory proof being exhibited to the collector, that she was ready for sailing, or even very nearly ready on the 16th of August. She may now be permitted to depart, on condition that she does depart within such time as the state of her preparation, somewhat of course relaxed during the suspension, may in the judgment of the collector render necessary. The reasons for originally limiting a day, increased by time require the exaction of this condition. _Himeley's Case._