<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">60546278X</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20210128100250.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">210128e20150801xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/s10991-015-9158-7</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10991-015-9158-7</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Rowbotham</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Judith</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">School of Law, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2">
   <subfield code="a">A Deception on the Public: The Real Scandal of Boulton and Park</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Judith Rowbotham]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">The Boulton and Park case has become one of the cause célèbre regularly cited by historians and lawyers studying the regulation of sexuality. The trial, and the role of expert witnesses in the ultimate decision to acquit, has been meticulously picked over. Rather less attention has been paid to the inception of the prosecution and the way in which that frames the subsequent trial in May 1871. Placing that trial in a wider socio-legal perspective reveals how masquerading as females regarded by the Victorian court process and the media in the light of deception, and contemporary fears about the nature of that deception which went beyond the ‘wickedness' of sexual deviance into other areas of criminality. It also leads to a suggestion that one of the most significant thing, for contemporaries, about the episode was the delaying of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1879, setting up the office of the Public Prosecutor, given the perceived failure of the Treasury Solicitor's Department in this case.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, 2015</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Cross-dressing</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Criminality and sexuality</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Prosecution in the public interest</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Boulton and Park</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Liverpool Law Review</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">36/2(2015-08-01), 123-145</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0144-932X</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">36:2&lt;123</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2015</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">36</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10991</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-015-9158-7</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-015-9158-7</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Rowbotham</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Judith</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">School of Law, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Liverpool Law Review</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">36/2(2015-08-01), 123-145</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0144-932X</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">36:2&lt;123</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2015</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">36</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10991</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
