McGowen, Randall 1948-

views updated

McGOWEN, Randall 1948-

PERSONAL: Born 1948. Education: American University, Washington, DC, B.A., 1970; University of Illinois, M.A., 1971; Ph.D., 1979.

ADDRESSES: Offıce—University of Oregon, Department of History, 365 McKenzie Hall, Eugene, OR 97403. E-mail—[email protected].

CAREER: University of Oregon, Eugene, history professor, 1982—.

AWARDS, HONORS: McMaster University, American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies fellowship, 1993; University of Oregon Center for the Study of Women in Society research grant, 1994.

WRITINGS:

(With Donna T. Andrew) The Perreaus and Mrs. Rudd: Forgery and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century London. University of California Press (Berkeley, CA), 2001.

Contributor to Buffalo Law Review and Oxford History of the Prison, 1996.

WORK IN PROGRESS: Researching the death penalty and criminal law in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Britain.

SIDELIGHTS: In The Perreaus and Mrs. Rudd: Forgery and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century London, Randall McGowen and Donna T. Andrews present a thoroughly researched and detailed study of a high-class scandal, an infamous case that shocked and intrigued middle- and upper-middle-class Londoners in 1775. Robert and Daniel Perreau, identical twin brothers in their forties and well respected in British society, and Daniel's elegant mistress and mother of his children, Mrs. Margaret Caroline Rudd, were accused of the bond forgery of several thousand pounds. The event occurred in a time of booming commercialism and consumerism, in which paper instruments such as IOU's and bonds of credit often substituted for money. Moreover, it was a time when such transactions transpired between personal acquaintances, via family connections, and betwen college or military alumni and which were sealed with a handshake. Because of the Perreaus' excellent reputation based on what seemed to be irreproachable prior business transactions, the initial legal investigation was leading toward simple clarification.

Unfortunately for the brothers, however, Rudd crumbled under scrutiny, accusing her "husband" of holding a knife to her throat and forcing her to write forged bonds to finance his high-class lifestyle and gambling habit. "The result was consternation," commented David Nokes in Spectator. "Examined personally by the blind John Fielding, Mrs. Rudd repeated her testimony in such a 'faltering, pathetic voice' that the Perreaus were immediately transferred to Newgate [prison], while Rudd was released on a modest bail." However, at their trial at the Old Bailey courthouse, the brothers vehemently denied their guilt and pointed to Rudd as the artful, contriving mastermind who led them into the crime with her trickery. After deliberating for just ten minutes, however, the jury found the brothers guilty. The news media became infatuated with the case, as did the public. It thus consumed reporters and readers alike from March until January of the following year. The presses published letters from the public, who vehemently expressed opinions and concerns. Thus, explain McGowen and Andrews, "the papers helped to produce a new genre, the sensational criminal trial."

Rudd testified at neither trial, and all would have been well for her except that she decided to capitalize financially on the case by publishing her life story and loudly proclaiming her own innocence. "In London, with a newly established press . . . editors scented a fresh sensational interest in this new genre of the criminal trial," commented Nokes. Soon rumors abounded of Rudd's guilt, and she, too, went to trial. The presiding judge and the press seemed certain of her guilt, but the jury nonetheless returned a not guilty verdict. The papers called her acquittal a scandal and a disgrace to the justice system and the nation. The Perreau twins were hanged in January 1776, still declaring their innocence; Rudd went free, albeit in financial ruin and as a social outcast.

A contributor for Kirkus Reviews wrote of The Perreaus and Mrs. Rudd that "Andrew and McGowen are careful researchers and they do a good job of elucidating the social history of the time. . . . Ultimately, however, their bloodless exposition overcomes the inherent interest of the story." Nigel Tappin, in contrast, commented in Library Journal that the authors "present a readable, meticulous study that offers insights into women's status, law, economy and society." In the London Review of Books, Dror Wahrman wrote: "Andrew and McGowen . . . situate the story in its wider contemporary setting. Indeed, it is only against the backdrop of the peculiarities of metropolitan society in the second half of the eighteenth century that we can begin to understand how and why this story captured people's imaginations and attention to the extent it did."

McGowen currently teaches courses on Western Civilization, British history, Indian history, and world history at the University of Oregon.