and decide the case from the analogies as they present themselves. Glanville Williams contends that there is no presumption that the law is in any body's
64 favour. On the issue of expansibility of the law of Tort (ie, development of the Law of Tort) Glanville Williams sees a lot of merit in the General Theory School. The General Theory School insists that Law is neither fragmentary nor static. Professor Williams argues that "Law is like apparel, which alters with the time". Glanville Williams, on behalf of the school which regards the basis of Tortious Liability to be individual and distinct Torts, points out that the Pigeon Theory School does not regard the Law of Torts to be unconnected bits and pieces. He regards it unfair to assume Salmond's theory sees nothing but shreds and patches in the law of civil wrongs. Glanville Williams is of the view that both schools agree that Law of Tort is not a closed system. It has room for development as society changes. To say that the law can be collected into pigeon holes does not mean that these pigeon holes may not be capacious nor does it mean that they are incapable of being added to. After showing that there are no apparent differences between the General Theory school and pigeon Theory School, Glanville Williams gives the following analysis on the controversy: (a) First School has shown that the rules of liability are very wide; (b) But the second school has also shown that some rules of absence of liability are very wide [law of Tort is as much about liability as it is about non-liability];
