General Scott had animadverted upon the terms granted by Worth to the functionaries of the city of Puebla, about May 15, 1847, and strongly censured the circular referred to. These reproofs induced General Worth to call for a court of inquiry, which was ordered to convene June 17, 1847, at 10 o'clock A.M. The court met, and General Worth submitted a statement of the matters in which he deemed himself wronged by the general in chief, and to which he invited investigation. The court gave the matters before it careful consideration on the evidence adduced and the documents submitted, and pronounced their opinions. The court found nothing in the remarks of the general in chief in regard to General Worth's terms to the functionaries of Puebla to which he [Worth] could take exception; "that the terms or stipulations granted by Brevet Major-General Worth to the functionaries of the city of Puebla upon his entrance with his advance of the army on the 15th of May last were unnecessarily yielded, improvident, and in effect detrimental to the public service," and continues: "The court, as required, further declares its opinion that the 'circular' published by Brevet Major-General Worth to his division, dated Puebla, June 16, 1847, was highly improper and extremely objectionable in many respects, especially as it might tend, by exasperating the whole Mexican nation, to thwart the well-known pacific policy of the United States, and, in view of the high source from which it emanated, to disturb the friendly relations of our Government with Spain, or at least give occasion to that power to call for explanations or apologies. The barbarous offense against which that 'circular' warned the soldiers of the First Division, if it exists at all, equally affected the whole army. The information obtained by General Worth, if worthy of notice, should therefore have been communicated to the general in chief, that he might have exercised his discretion on the means to be adopted for correcting the evil. With these views of the 'circular' alluded to the court is of the opinion that it called for the 'emphatic admonition' and rebuke of the general in chief."