shocked public opinion, in which event they left it to Parliament to create it or not, as Parliament pleased it". (v) Winfield has also contended that for many centuries English Law has been changing through judicial decisions and the changes have never been inhibited by lack of appropriate pigeon holes: In the early days of English writ system new remedies were created freely enough. He cites Glanville's time, the King not only sold writs, but made them and courts, unhampered by precedents were doing justice on principles of moral fairness, and were administering equity long before men had dreamed of equity as something distinct from Common Law. You must make it a point of reading all the cases and articles elaborating the positions taken by scholars in support of their respective positions on Foundations of Tortious Liability. (vi) Some other authorities cited by Professor Winfield in support of General Principle on Foundations of Tortious liability include:
56 (a) He argues that Blackstone 11 is markedly in favour of a general liability in Tort and so were his contemporaries; (b) Pratt, CJ. Once said that "Torts are infinitely various, not limited or confined"; 12 (c) Lord Mansfield is reported to have referred to Action Upon Case as "liberal action"; 13 (d) That Brown, LJ. once expressed the view that at Common Law there was a cause of action whenever one
