Robt Newell's 1844 Paroutopic Toiken Lock

Doug MacQueen

You won’t see any pictures of this original patent lock as I haven’t found any. It is patent no. 3,747 dated Sept 17, 1844. The Greek parouptic toiken translates to “hidden from view by a wall”. The changes seen in this lock are most likely the result of his first lock having being picked open, and not necessarily by a burglar. The focus is separating the tumbler gating information from the tumbler bellies contacted by the key, both visually and mechanically. I will try to make a blow up of the patent drawing to explain this in the next post. Doug

Doug MacQueen

Here is the patent drawing of the lock showing the how the tumbler is now made of two sections, the key contact section and the follower gating section. The separate drawing is the key contact section alone. Note that that I mistakenly darkened the spring lever above the key section of the tumbler. It’s spring lever actually is coming into the center of the tumbler from the right. So these two parts are both spring loaded, one down and one up, working against each other. But the key section spring is stronger and holds both sections down. Only when the key bitting lifts the key section can the follower move up, which it will do unless there is a binding of the bolt against that particular lever. In that case the follower stays put even though the key has raised the tumbler. This was all about tentative pick protection. Did it succeed? Doug

Doug MacQueen

Studying the action of locks purely through patent drawings is not always easy. It must be remembered that this lock , like his first, was a resettable lock, making it even more complex. The follower gating is not your typical small gating found in lever locks, but much larger. In the drawing, the point of connection of the two sections was not made clear and it took me some time to decipher that the key section had an arm that reached over top of the wall separating the followers from the key sections. The wall being the Paroutopic Toiken. At the bolt end of the lock, there are parts not seen in any of the other Parautopic locks in the Mossman Collection or the Hobbs versions. It also has an anti-tilt spring loaded lever which latches the bolt, but whose spring is so weak it only comes into action if the lock laid down or upside down. i don’t know yet if this is continued in the later models. Doug

Doug MacQueen

The “Rudimentary Treatise on the Construction of Locks” by Tomlinson, is now found online I had copied this great little book around 30 years ago but at the time was not at all familiar with most of what he discussed. In it I did find that Newell himself picked his 1838 patent lock and set about to improve on it, resulting in the 1844 patent lock. Doug

Adrian Weber

Hey Doug,

the patents and the drawings look very interesting but I have to look more into it and maybe spent an hour studying it. I also find it quite difficult understanding such a complicated lock only by patent drawings.

I myself have never seen a Paroutopic lock in my life and will probably never have one. I have seen a video on YouTube once showing how it works very much in detail. The video was done by a collector and has been removed later (sadly…). I was not able to save it before it has been removed and would like to have it 🙁:

Adrian

Doug MacQueen

Yes it can be difficult. For those of you who have the Mossman Collection disc, check out lock 228. This appears to be a design that would put it in between the 1838 and 1844 patents. It does not seem to be complete, but it clearly is using the walled idea put forth in the 1844 patent. Not sure whether it is auto re-settable or just putting the gating sections out of view. This lock is mentioned in “Lure of the Lock” but not shown. Like dealing with patents alone, determining a locks action from a picture is often not obvious. Doug Adrian, BTW I am now in possession of the Master 19, new in box, will it ship soon.

4xlock

Regarding case 3 No 228 Mossman CD. If you want the CD they were available from the General Society in New York. I think I paid $150 a few years ago. Money well spent and helps support a good cause. If you have “American Genius” & “Lure of the Lock” You need this.

Re the lock 228. I’m not so sure. It looks like a barrel has been removed for photography but looking at the drill pin, it is offset making the barrel turn eccentrically. Apart from the cap I think everything else is there. I have not seen this eccentric barrel in a patent prior to Mar 1846. This eccentric cam, in a particular form, was patented by Day & Newell’s former apprentice, Francis B Pye (son of Wm. Pye who was the son of Thomas Pye). I suspect this lock may be one of his designs. He also developed this style of lock whilst at Day & Newell’s. His 1846 patent was a triple transmutation lock based on the lever rather than slider if my reading of the patent is correct. The Paras no doubt went through a variety of additions in between this 1844 and the 1851 patent of Newell’s. One thing that may indicate Pye’s influence is that the stump is at the back end of the lock. Regarding the barrel, in Pye’s patent he states the following.

“The manner of arranging and combining the hoop A with the revolving plate C the partition piece F and with the key levers D: the pin that receives the barrel being placed eccentrically with the hoop, and the hoop and the plate C revolving with each other as described”

Checking the original patent of 1844 for the Parautoptic. The diagrams do not contain a barrel. I stand to be corrected. My eyesight is not what it used to be.
I’ve scoured the main picture and can’t see it. I don’t have a Para and have handled only a few. Being in the UK there just aren’t many here. Especially 1st generation, if any. There may be others with a stamp on the bolt of this date but may have been produced later. If any of you guys in the US need to donate one please feel free.

Also the main principle of the walls were the focus of the patent. If they were produced before this then ‘prior art’ springs to mind. Given the major fighting between Wm. Hall, Jones, D&N, Andrews etc at this time it almost certainly would have been challenged.

If anyone out there can confirm or contradict anything, It would be much appreciated it. I’ve acquired a lot of documents going back to 1820’s with regard these early lock makers and one thing is for sure… there are so many incorrect facts stated back then. Claims & counter claims. It is difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Huw Eastwood

Very intriguing lock and and an absorbing thread- some very interesting info there.

4xlock- Apologies but it raised a smile when you said your eyesight isn’t what it used to be- I don’t think mine will ever be the same after reading that!
I didn’t know the font on here went that small!

Guess I should have gone to Specsavers………🙁giggle):

Very interesting stuff though and a great read 🙁y):

Doug MacQueen

4X, your input here is greatly appreciated. It was the angled slotted bracket with nothing in the slot that caught my eye. If I make it back to the museum, that will be the first lock I look at, very closely. On the 1844 patent, it is both the wall AND the tumbler followers that were the focus in the patent. The wall being much more obvious though. It was only through careful reading of the patent, that I was able to determine the purpose of the followers and how they worked. I have not yet completed my study of the 1851 patent, but I see the action/interaction of the followers and tumblers is changed somewhat. And yes I won’t turn down anyone offering up a sample to study. Again, thank you and feel free to post any (all) of this early info you have been able to collect. Doug

4xlock

It’s funny, reviving this thread lock 228 has similarities with Davidson lock 79 in case 3. Bolt stump at right of case.

Oliver

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkygk24t3sU

🙁y):🙁rofl):

Paul Prescott

I regret selling mine, on average about 3 times a day ……….