HISTORYOFLOCKS
SPONSORED BY ADVANCED KEYS
BRIAN MORLAND provides us with some more fascinating information on the history of locks.
The Anti-Pressure Device
Towards the end of the Georgian period, and with the gathering momentum of
the Industrial revolution, the principles that make a lock secure started to be
explored. Barron, quickly followed by Bramah, both used a hitherto completely
different method to achieve security, the double acting principle.
The double acting principle
is where the key lifts the
tumbler, lever or slider to a
precise height to allow the
bolt stump to enter the gate,
or in the case of the Bramah,
the barrel to rotate. Underlifting or over-lifting of these
levers or sliders blocks one or
more of the components, the
lifting has to be precise.
The method of opening locks
employing the double acting
principle must have been
realised quite early on. Wards,
therefore, continued to be
used greatly hampering the
technique; additionally Walton
and others at the beginning
of the 19th century started to
use false notches as well as
wards in their lever locks. The
inference being that the trade,
the locksmiths themselves,
knew about the weaknesses even if that method of attack
wasn’t generally criminally
applied or even known about.
So the double acting lever,
although ground breaking
at the time, needed to be
supplemented by some
additional principles.
A Walton lock, dating from the
early 1800’s, featuring double
acting levers, reinforced
by false notches and both
wheel and plate wards.
32
MAR/APR 2014
An early Chubb lock from 1819,
here the double acting levers
are reinforced by the detector.
One early method was the
much publicised ‘detector
lock’ patented by Jeremiah
Chubb in 1818. This principle
blocked the lock when one
of the levers was over lifted
alerting the owner that an
attempt had been made. The
late Georgian to early Victorian
period was in many respects
the learning of the new
‘sciences of locking principles’
and inevitably, that learning
was done the hard way.
Chubb, for instance, had
successfully established his
detector lock so much so that
he sub-contracted to various
locksmiths the manufacture
of his locks. One such subcontractor was Richards, a
Wolverhampton locksmith.
Richards in turn, and
unknown to Chubb, further
sub-contracted to another
locksmith – Thomas Hart.
But first let us set the working
scene in those days. There
were armies of locksmiths
hand-crafting and fettling
away, but there was little
in the way of machines.
The tools of the trade were
predominantly the file, chisel
and hammer. Locks, although
mass-produced, were all
handmade. So, successful
locks like those of Chubb’s,
had to be sub-contracted to
keep manufacture in pace with
the demand. There were firms
that specialised in filling this
demand, such as Richards of
Wolverhampton. And very
often the sub-contractors
would further sub-contract.
These locksmiths were very
skilled and also knew every
method or technique to assist
in production, the work, all
day every day, meant that
it became intuitive. The
locksmith’s mind while he
was working was always
thinking of more efficient
ways of meeting his targets.
Hart was one such locksmith
sub-contracted by Richards.
He skilfully and intuitively met
all his quotas, and allowed his
mind to reason and speculate
on the security of the lock he
was making, (Chubbs New
Patent design) and formulated
a technique to open it. Even
though it was a detector lock,
it could be opened by the
tentative method but with
the additional information
gleaned by inspection through
the keyhole – it seems the lever
bellies gave strong indicators.
The resulting challenges and
trials proved inconclusive as
far as Chubb would admit
publically and nothing was
done.
The years passed by with no
improvement to the Chubb
design, that is, until the
World’s Fair of 1851, when
the American Alfred Hobbs
shook everybody by opening
the locks of Chubb, Bramah
and others - demonstrating
very publicly their weaknesses.
The story of these challenges
has been we