An argument addressed by him to the court and jury, in one of the
innumerable trials of the Bishop-farm case, is among the papers on
file. It appears to be a verbatim report of the speech as it was
delivered at the time, and proves him to have been a man of talents.
It is courteous, gentlemanly, and, I might say, scholarly in its
diction and style, skilful in its statements, and forcible in its
arguments.

In all the earlier trials, the juries uniformly gave verdicts in favor
of Endicott; but Allen carried the cases up to the General Court,
which exercised a final and unrestrained jurisdiction in all matters
referred to it. It usually appointed committees or commissioners to
examine such questions, accepted their reports, and made them binding.
Lands were thus disposed of without the agency, and against the
decisions, of juries. In his arguments addressed to the General Court,
Zerubabel Endicott protested against this jurisdiction, by which his
lands were taken from him "by a committee, in an arbitrary way, being
neither bound nor sworn by law or evidence." He boldly denounced it.

"To be disseized of my inheritance; to be judged by three or
four committee-men, who are neither bound to law nor
evidence,--who are, or may be, mutable in their
apprehensions, doing one thing to-day, and soon again
undoing what they did,--I conceive, to be judged in such an
arbitrary way is repugnant to the fundamental law of England
contained in Magna Charta, chap. 29, which says no freeman
shall be disseized of his freehold but by the lawful
judgment of his peers,--that is to say, by due process of
law; which was also confirmed by the Petition of Right, by
Act of Parliament, _tertio Caroli I_. And also such