Where the stock of two railroad compa nies is held by a holding company, it may be sufficient to bring them within the interstate commerce act where the joint work perform ed by both of them will do so ; U. S. v. Stock Yard, 226 U. S. 286, 33 Sup. Ct. 83, 57 L. Ed. 226.
A Massachusetts statute forbids railroad companies from holding, directly or indirect ly, the stock of any other corporation ; see Attorney General v. R. Co., 198 Mass. 413, 84 N. E. 737; while in Connecticut one railroad company may buy a majority of the stock of another and in some cases condemn the minority holdings.
Where an insurance company acquired a majority of the stock of a trust company, and the latter acquired a majority of the stock of the former, it was held illegal upon a bill by a dissenting stockholder of the in surance company ; •Robotham v. Ins. Co., 64 N. J. Eq. 673, 53 Atl. 842.
A New Jersey corporation, with power to do so, may buy .stock in another company and guarantee and agree to pay dividends on outstanding prior stock of the latter cor poration ; Windmuller v. Distilling Co., 186 N. Y. 572, 79 N. E. 1119; and may legally acquire a majority of the stock of street rail ways in different cities in Tennessee, if it does not create an unlawful restraint of trade; Clark v. Ry. Co., 123 Tenn. 232, 130 S. W. 751.
Where one railroad holds a small minority interest in another, no more than two-thir teenths, it is not an unlawful combination ; State v. Missouri Ry. Co., 241 Mo. 1, 144 S. W. 863.; but in Central R. Co. v. Collins, 40 Ga. 582, one railroad company was enjoined from purchasing a minority interest in a competing line.
The ownership of stock in a coal producing company by a railroad company does not cause it, as the owner of such stock, to have a legal interest in the commodity manufac tured by the producing company ; U. S. v. Delaware & H. Co., 213 U. S. 366, 29 Sup. Ct. 527, 53 L. Ed. 836.
A corporation owning all the stock of an other corporation may take the profits of the latter without a declaration of a formal divi dend, if other parties are not prejudiced ; Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Trust Co., 135 Ga. 472, 69 S. E. 708.
A corporation organized in Delaware by residents of Pennsylvania, to own stock of and finance Pennsylvania corporations, hav ing the same officers and substantially the same stockholders, and which maintains its office and holds directors' meetings, etc., in Pennsylvania, was held to be doing business in Pennsylvania and bound to register there under the statute ; Colonial Trust Co. v. Brick Works, 172 Fed. 310, 97 C. C. A. 144.
Shares of stock in an elevator company owned by a railroad company do not become subject to the general mortgage of the lat ter; Humphreys v. McKissock, 140 U. S. 304, 11 Sup. Ct. 779, 35 L. Ed. 473; but it is held that stock belonging to a railroad passes to its receiver when foreclosure of a mort gage is begun, and becomes subject thereto ; Herring v. R. Co., 105 N. Y. 340, 12 N. E. 763.
The subject is fully treated in Cook, Cor porations. See VOTING TRUSTS; RESTRAINT or TRADE.