Then it is said that there are several rights. The opponents to the motion, including the company's directors and the chairman, Mr Lushington, proposed to amend the resolution so it had the opposite effect. I cannot deprive him of his property, although he may not make use of that right of property in a way I might altogether approve. Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles. In all cases of this kind, where men exercise their rights of property, they exercise their rights from some motive adequate or inadequate, and I have always considered the law to be that those who have the rights of property are entitled to exercise them, whatever their motives may be for such exercise—that is as regards a Court of Law as distinguished from a court of morality or conscience, if such a court exists. The only other point was as to the resolutions themselves. Even if that is not the true meaning of the judgment, and it is not quite so explicit as I could have wished for my guidance, then the only other alternative is that it is a case in which it would be impossible for relief to be obtained by the company bringing an action, and it must be within the exception pointed out in Foss v Harbottle, that the shareholders must have a right to institute an action in the name of one or more, because otherwise it would be impossible to maintain an action at all.