Chapter XII English Patents for Locks — Aubin’s Lock Trophy
We propose to conclude this small work with a few details respecting the various patented inventions in locks, and concerning Mr. Aubin’s remarkable lock trophy. These two subjects relate to locks in general, rather than to any specified constructions in particular, and can on that account more conveniently be given here than in connexion with any of the foregoing chapters.
Mr. Chubb, in the appendix to his paper on locks and keys read before the Institution of Civil Engineers, gave a useful list of all the patents taken out in England in relation to this subject, down to the year 1849. We here transcribe this list:
List of Patents for Locks and Latches granted since the Establishment of the Patent Laws.
“As no complete list of the patents granted for locks from the time of James I. has hitherto been published, it is believed that the following list, which has been very carefully drawn up, and which comprises all patents from the year 1774, when the first patent for a lock was granted, to the present time, will be found useful as a reference for all who are interested in the subject.
| 1774 | May | 27 | Black, George, Berwick-on-Tweed. |
| „ | „ | „ | Barron, Robert, London. |
| 1778 | May | 29 | Martin, Joshua Lover, Fleet-street, London. |
| 1779 | May | 28 | Henry, Solomon, Swithin’s-lane, London. |
| 1780 | March | 4 | Campion, J. Newcastle-court, Strand, London. |
| 1782 | January | 18 | Hutchinson, Samuel, Marylebone, London. |
| 1784 | „ | Bramah, Joseph, Piccadilly, London. | |
| 1789 | July | 7 | Cornthwaite, Thomas, Kendal, Westmoreland. |
| 1790 | February | 23 | Rowntree, Thomas, Surrey-street, Blackfriars, London. |
| „ | October | 29 | Bird, Moses, Wardour-street, London. |
| 1791 | July | 19 | Ferryman, Rev. Robert, Gloucester. |
| „ | November | 3 | Antis, John, Fulneck, near Leeds. |
| 1797 | November | 18 | Langton, Daniel. |
| 1798 | May | 3 | Bramah, Joseph. |
| „ | December | 8 | Turner, Thomas. |
| 1799 | April | 11 | Davis, George. |
| 1801 | February | 10 | Scott, Richard, Lieut.-Colonel. |
| „ | June | 24 | Holemberg, Samuel, London. |
| „ | ... | Roux, Albert, Switzerland. | |
| 1805 | May | 18 | Stansbury, Abraham Ogier, New York. |
| „ | December | 29 | Thompson, William, Birmingham. |
| 1815 | March | 7 | Mitchell, William, Glasgow; and Lawton, John, London. |
| 1816 | May | 14 | Ruxton, Thomas, Esq., Dublin. |
| 1817 | February | 8 | Clark, William, Esq., Bath. |
| 1818 | February | 3 | Chubb, Jeremiah, Portsea. |
| 1819 | October | 18 | Strutt, Anthony Radford, Mackeney. |
| 1820 | April | 11 | Jennings, Henry Constantine, Esq., Middlesex. |
| „ | December | 14 | Mallett, William, Dublin. |
| 1823 | July | 10 | Fairbanks, Stephen, Middlesex. |
| „ | November | 13 | Ward, John, Middlesex. |
| 1824 | June | 15 | Chubb, Charles, Portsea. |
| 1825 | May | 14 | Young, John, Wolverhampton. |
| 1828 | May | 17 | Chubb, Charles, London. |
| 1829 | June | 1 | Gottlieb, Andrew, Middlesex. |
| 1830 | January | 18 | Carpenter, James, and Young, John, Wolverhampton. |
| „ | January | 26 | Arnold, John, Sheffield. |
| 1831 | April | 14 | Rutherford, William, Jedburgh, N.B. |
| „ | May | 23 | Barnard, George, Bristol. |
| „ | July | 27 | Young, John, Wolverhampton. |
| 1832 | December | 20 | Parsons, Thomas, London. |
| 1833 | December | 3 | Parsons, T., Newport, Salop. |
| „ | December | 20 | Chubb, Charles, London; and Hunter, E., Wolverhampton. |
| 1834 | September | 6 | Longfield, William, Otley. |
| „ | October | 11 | Audley, Lord Baron Stafford. |
| 1835 | March | 18 | Hill, R., Birmingham. |
| „ | December | 16 | Warwick, J., London. |
| 1836 | February | 10 | Fenton, Rev. S., Pembroke. |
| 1838 | June | 30 | Uzielli, M., London. |
| „ | November | 13 | Thompson, S., London. |
| 1839 | February | 21 | Uzielli, M., London. |
| „ | June | 12 | Sanders, J. Stafford. |
| „ | July | 3 | Cochrane, A., Strand, London. |
| „ | July | 20 | Schwieso, J. C., London. |
| „ | August | 1 | Williams, W. M., London. |
| „ | December | 2 | Guest, J., jun., Birmingham. |
| 1840 | February | 27 | Williams, W. M., London. |
| „ | March | 20 | Gerish, F. W. |
| „ | May | 2 | Pearse, W., Hoxton, Middlesex. |
| „ | June | 13 | Wolverson, J., and Rawlett, W., Stafford. |
| „ | October | 22 | Clark, T. |
| „ | December | 23 | Baillie, B., London. |
| 1841 | March | 29 | Tildesley and Sanders, Willenhall and Wolverhampton. |
| „ | May | 6 | Hancock, James, Sidney-square, Mile End. |
| „ | July | 14 | Berry, Miles, Chancery-lane. |
| „ | September | 28 | Strong, Theodore Frederick, Goswell-road. |
| „ | November | 9 | Smith, Jesse, Wolverhampton. |
| 1842 | January | 15 | Poole, Moses, Lincoln’s-inn. |
| „ | May | 24 | Duce, Joseph, Wolverhampton. |
| „ | June | 1 | Williams, W. M., 163 Fenchurch-street. |
| „ | December | 29 | Rock, Joseph, jun., Birmingham. |
| 1843 | November | 25 | Tann, E. E. and J., Hackney-road. |
| „ | „ | „ | Rock, Joseph, jun., Birmingham. |
| 1844 | July | 30 | Fletcher, Rev. William, Moreton House, Buckingham. |
| 1845 | April | 15 | Carter, George, Willenhall. |
| „ | July | 12 | Ratcliff, Edmund, Birmingham. |
| „ | December | 4 | Poole, Moses, Lincoln’s-inn. |
| „ | December | 22 | Smith, Philip, High-street, Lambeth. |
| 1846 | July | 6 | De la Fons, John Palmer, Carleton-hill, St. John’s Wood. |
| „ | July | 15 | Thomas, William, Cheapside. |
| „ | December | 14 | Chubb, John, St. Paul’s Churchyard. |
| 1847 | January | 11 | Chubb, John, and Hunter, Ebenezer, sen., St. Paul’s Churchyard. |
| „ | April | 15 | Collett, Charles Minors, 62 Chancery-lane. |
| 1848 | September | 28 | Newall, Robert Stirling, Gateshead. |
| 1849 | May | 8 | Wilkes, Samuel, Wednesbury-heath, Wolverhampton. |
Mr. Chubb also gave a list of such papers m the Transactions of the Society of Arts as refer to locks and keys.
List of References to the “Transactions of the Society of Arts,” on the subject of Locks.
| vol. | page. | vol. | page. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 317 | Mr. | Moore. | 38. | 111 | Mr. | A. Ainger. |
| 2. | 187 | „ | Cornthwaite. | „ | 205 | „ | Bramah. |
| 3. | 160 | Marquis of Worcester. | 42. | 125 | „ | J. Duce. | |
| „ | 165 | Mr. | Mr. Taylor. | 43. | 114 | „ | W. Friend. |
| „ | 163 | „ | Marshall. | 45. | 123 | „ | Machin. |
| 18. | 239 | „ | T. Arkwright. | 48. | 132 | „ | S. Mordan. |
| „ | 243 | „ | Bullock. | 50. | 86 | „ | A. Mackinnon. |
| 19. | 290 | „ | W. Bullock. | 51. | 128 | „ | J. Meighan. |
| 36. | 111 | „ | M. Somerford. | ||||
Among the most curious mechanical productions in the Great Exhibition of 1851, was one which attracted very little notice, viz. that forwarded by Mr. C. Aubin of Wolverhampton. Whether it was that attention, so far as regards locks, was too much absorbed by the “lock controversy,” or whether there was a deficiency of descriptive cataloguing, no juror or newspaper critic, as far as we are aware, took notice of the production in question. In the Official Illustrated Catalogue it is entered simply as “Specimens to illustrate the rise and progress of the art of making locks, containing forty-four different movements by the most celebrated inventors in the lock trade.” This trophy of lock ingenuity (for such it may be justly considered to be) is now in the possession of Mr. Hobbs. Springing from a hexagonal base-piece is a central axis, about three feet in height, supporting four horizontal circular discs, placed at different parts of its height. Each of the vertical faces of the base-piece contains a lock, which is worked by its respective key. Each disc contains a number of locks: 16 on the lowest, 12 on the next above, 9 on the third in height, while a Bramah lock surmounts the whole. All the locks on the discs are so arranged that their bolts shoot outwards, or radially away from the axis of the machine. Every lock has its own proper key inserted in the key-hole; and as the locks lie down horizontally, the shaft of each key is of course vertical. There are delicate pieces of mechanism contained within the central axis and within the discs, consisting of levers, racks, and pinions; and the Bramah lock is contrived so ingeniously, that the Bramah key, by acting upon that lock, acts upon all this mechanism. The Bramah barrel, in rotating horizontally under the action of its key, gives a rotary movement to a rod passing vertically through the centre of the whole apparatus; this rod, at the levels of the several discs, acts upon racks and pinions, and these in turn act upon the key-pins of the several locks. When, therefore, the Bramah key is turned, the whole of these key-pins rotate, each exactly in the same way as if the lock were being closed or opened, and the bolts shoot in or out accordingly. The Bramah key, although it acts as a master-key, is not such as usually obtains that designation; it is simply a means of putting in action certain rack-and-pinion mechanism, which does not belong to lock-work considered per se. All the locks are faithful representatives of the several patents or modes of construction to which they severally refer; and each exhibits the works sufficiently open to display the principle on which it is arranged. Each lock is numbered, and is referred to in an accompanying description. The works are finished with the utmost care and polish; and the trophy being somewhat tastefully arranged, and kept under a glass shade, forms a really elegant specimen of mechanical skill.
For an account of the locks themselves which constitute this trophy, we cannot do better than avail ourselves of the description given in the article “Lock” in Tomlinson’s Cyclopædia of Useful Arts, adding a few further details in respect to some of the locks of the series. The locks are arranged and numbered according to their similarity of construction; and it is instructive to remark the evidence here afforded, that many patentees would have saved much time and money if they had better known the productions of their predecessors. In describing these locks we shall do so briefly, sufficient to shew their relative principles of construction; many of them having been described more or less fully in former chapters.
No. 1 on the list is called a Roman lock; it consists of a single bolt, with a binder-spring for holding the bolt in any position in which it may be placed until a sufficient force is applied to overcome it: it embodies the simple principle on which thousands of common locks are annually made.
No. 2, called a French lock (all such designations are of rather doubtful correctness), resembling No. 1 in every thing except having the addition of a friction-roller. The bolt of either of these two locks can easily be forced back by pressing on the end.
No. 3 is marked Ancient; it is a bolt-lock, and was found in an ancient building. It exhibits an improvement on both the former specimens, in so far as the bolt requires, before it can be shot, to be pressed down, in order to release it from a catch at the back end of the bolt; this release cannot be effected without the aid of a key or some other implement applied through the key-hole, and thus the bolt answers the purpose both of bolt and tumbler.
No. 4, also marked Ancient, is in principle a single-acting tumbler-lock; that is, one in which the tumbler may fail to be lifted high enough, but cannot be raised too high, to release the bolt: whereas a double-acting tumbler, being susceptible both of too much and too little ascent, must be raised to one definite and precise height to attain the required object.
No. 5, an old English lock, exhibits a great advance in principle, being provided with the double action just described as being wanting in No. 4.
No. 6, modern English (no maker’s name), is a single-acting tumbler-lock.
No. 7, by Mace, is a double-acting tumbler, but without exhibiting any peculiarities of construction.
No. 8 is Somerford’s first patent. It is a double-acting draw tumbler-lock; that is, there is a tumbler which is drawn down instead of being lifted, as in most locks.
No. 9, designated, we know not on what grounds, an Indian lock, has a single-acting tumbler with a pin.
No. 10, patented by Thompson in 1805. In this lock there are two tumblers, one of which is single and the other double-acting.
Next follow a considerable number of locks, which differ one from another too slightly to render any formal description necessary. No. 11, by Daniells, is a single-acting tumbler, differing only in form from those previously used. No. 12 is by Walton. No. 13 is Barron’s first patent, taken out in 1774. No. 14 is by Bickerton. No. 15 is a Dutch lock. No. 16 is by Duce, senior. No. 17, by Sanders, is a lock with four double-acting tumblers. No. 18, patented by Cornthwaite in 1789, is so nearly like Sanders’s, brought before public notice in 1839, as to corroborate what we have said concerning the identity, or at least close resemblance, of inventions widely asunder in point of time. No. 19 is by Richards and Peers.
No. 20 is Somerford’s second patent; a lock which seems to embody the principle of Mr. Tann’s “reliance-wards,” patented many years later. No. 21 is Rowntree’s lock, patented in 1790. No. 22 is the first patent lock of Duce, junior, dated 1823. No. 23 is Parsons’ first patent, of 1832. No. 24 is Bickerton’s second. No. 25, patented by Price in 1774; this, so far as at present appears, was the first lock ever constructed with four double-acting tumblers, bearing a closer resemblance than would generally be supposed to those patented by other persons in more recent years. No. 26 exhibits a somewhat similar coincidence. It was introduced by Aubin in 1830, and is furnished with a revolving curtain for the purpose of closing the key-hole during the revolution of the key. Other inventors have since then adopted the revolving curtain; and in a patent taken out so recently as 1852, this appendage is claimed as part of the patent.
No. 27 is Barron’s second patent, dated 1778; a lock which has perhaps been the model for a larger manufacture of plain simple tumbler-locks than any other. No. 28 is by Bird, 1790. No. 29 is the second patent of Duce, junior. No. 30 is Ruxton’s, 1818. No. 31 is Chubb’s simplified lock, 1834. No. 32 is by Marr. No. 33, by Tann, is the “reliance-ward” lock adverted to above as having been anticipated, in respect to its leading principle, by Somerford’s second patent. No. 34 is by Hunter, 1833. No. 35 is Parsons’ second patent, of the same year. No. 36 is by Lang, 1830. No. 37 is Lawton’s, dated 1815. No. 38, patented by Strutt in 1839, has an arrangement for holding the tumblers, in the event of a pressure being applied to the bolt; an arrangement bearing a considerable resemblance to one recently adopted in Chubb’s bankers’ lock. No. 39 is by Scott, 1815. No. 40, Chubb’s patent of 1818, is the original detector-lock of this maker. Most of the detectors since patented by various persons are little other than variations of Chubb’s original.
No. 41, Parsons’ third patent of 1833, is a changeable lock of peculiar construction. The elevation of the tumblers is regulated by an adjusting-screw passing through the lock to the inside of the door; this screw changes the positive but not the relative positions of the tumblers; so that the same difference in the steps of the key must be retained, the change being made only in the length of the bit: the number of changes for each lock is very limited.
No. 42, invented by Pierce in 1840, seems to be a carrying out of the plan suggested by the Marquis of Worcester in his Century of Inventions, where he says that “a lock may be so constructed that if a stranger attempteth to open it, it catches his hand as a trap catcheth a fox; though far from maiming him for life, yet marketh him so, that if once suspected he might easily be detected.” In Pierce’s lock a steel barb or sharp arrow-head is concealed below the key-hole, in such a manner that if any person in attempting to open the lock should over-lift the tumbler, the barb would be thrust by a spring into his hand. It is said that the patentee himself experienced the efficacy of this invention, by receiving the barb into his own hand.
No. 43, by Ruxton, patented in 1816, is furnished with a tell-tale, so arranged that if the tumbler be over-lifted in an attempt to pick the lock, a pin or catch is thrown out from the lock, which would be visible on opening the lock with the proper key. This invention preceded Chubb’s detector by two years, and would be entitled to some of the honours of originality were not Chubb’s arrangement much more simple and effective.
No. 44 is Bramah’s, the patent of 1784, and the crowning lock of the trophy, by which all the others are opened. Similar locks by Russell and Mordan are applications of the Bramah principle, with little or no variation.
No attempt has been made in these pages to describe every variety of lock that has been introduced. Several forms of puzzle locks, known as Russian and Chinese locks, have the forms of various animals, and they are locked and unlocked by pressing upon or moving some portion of the body of the animal: the security of such locks depends in many cases upon keeping the part to be pressed or moved secret. There are also various forms of alarum locks; but these do not greatly differ from common locks, except in having certain appendages, such as a pistol, which if loaded and properly adjusted, will be fired on any attempt being made to open the lock, either with its own key or some other instrument. Some locks are furnished with a bell or a rattle, which is rung or sprung on attempting to open the lock, and in this way the inmates of the house are informed of the attempt to effect an entrance. It will, however, be evident to any one who has read the preceding pages, that devices of this kind do not add to the security of the lock; they rather tend to degrade the art of the locksmith to that of the toyman. The locksmith, in common with every other artist, can only improve in his art by studying the principles upon which it rests, and illustrating them by the most approved examples which the constructive genius of his predecessors or contemporaries has furnished.