Case Name: OLIVIER v. HYLAND
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1911-04-11
Citations: 186 F. 843
Docket Number: No. 2,093
Parties: OLIVIER v. HYLAND.
Judges: Before PARDEE and McCORMICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 186
Pages: 843–843

Head Matter:
OLIVIER v. HYLAND.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 11, 1911.)
No. 2,093.
Neutrality Laws (§ 4 ) — Proceeding Against Vessel for Violation— Bight of United States to Contkol.
Proceedings for the enforcement of the neutrality laws are necessarily under control of the United States, and a proceeding against a vessel, seized on complaint of an informer for violation of section 11 of the 1 enai Laws (Act March 4, 1909, C. 321, 35 Stat. 1090 [L. S. Comp. St. SupjE 1909, p. 1393]), cannot he continued, if the United States disavows ana declines to ratify the seizure.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Neutrality Laws, Dec. Dig. § 4. J
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Libel of information by Albert J. Olivier against the Steamship Venus, Thomas F. Hyland, master, claimant; United States, inter-vener. Decree for respondent, and libelant appeals.
Affirmed.
Armand Remain, for appellant.
W. J. Waguespack, Solomon Wolif, and Jno. D. Grace, for ap-pellee.
Before PARDEE and McCORMICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The enforcement of the neutrality laws of the United States is of necessity under the control of the government of the United States. Where a seizure is made on complaint of an informer for violation ©f section 11, Penal Laws of the United States, and the United States, through its proper representatives, intervenes, disavows, and declines to ratify the seizure, as in the instant case, the informer can have no such inchoate or other interest as will permit the further .prosecution of the case in his behalf.
The decree appealed from is affirmed.