Electric Amuser info

[arrgee]

I'm still holding out hope for open season on politicians

Many have the same sentiments about our UK politicians John, however, I still believe that the US have the best politicians that money can buy.

[pennymachines]

Lot 739, The Electric Amuser sold for £460 at Canterbury Auction Galleries on 17th Feb. then reappeared four days later as lot 216 in the EH auction, selling for £640! It had the shocker gubbins intact.

[widget2k4]

I got outbid at the Canterbury auction at £450. I chose not to go higher because of the 27% commission then the money to get it collected, however I was the successful buyer at EH at £640, bought purely because it was complete and I was hoping to replicate it onto my previous one which had quite a bit missing.

[badpenny]

Did you know it was the same machine?
BP

[widget2k4]

Yes mate, knew it was the same one and didn't want to miss out on it a second time around.

[pennymachines]

Quality will out, as they say. It's a nice machine and should certainly help you complete the other one. Unlike the German J&M example which Marco posted, yours are made in Birmingham, UK by the Coin Operating Company. Compare the first Electric Amuser you bought with the very similar Electric Allwin De Luxe I posted in this thread. Something quite unusual about these is that the reserve balls are hidden behind the instruction card which describes the reserve ball feature. It's also strange that the 'Electric Allwin' pictured in this advert (with identical carved top to yours) doesn't actually have the shocker fitted.

[pennymachines]

I said earlier that I didn't think the electric shock feature was tested in law, but in fact these newspaper reports from the Glamorgan Gazette, 8th of May, 1914 and The Luton News, 1st of October 1914, show that it was used to argue the case in court, albeit unsuccessfully in these instances.

SKILL OR A GAME OF CHANCE ?

INTERESTING CASE AT BRIDGEND POLICE COURT.
THE ELECTRA AMUSER.
DEMONSTRATIONS IN COURT.

A penny-in-the-slot machine was placed on the solicitors' table at Bridgend Police Court on Saturday. All the officials, police officers and solicitors gathered round to watch how a police sergeant received an electric shock, and then what fortune befell him in manipulating a ball into certain holes, one of which was called the "bull's eye." The interesting performance was the outcome of a summons against John Louie and Antonio Belli, refreshment house keepers, of Ogmore Vale, for having allowed on their premises an unlawful game, to wit, a game of chance; and Babinato Antonio was summoned for having aided and abetted.

The sergeant received the electric shock without flinching and scored a bull's eye with the first shot, but Mr. Parry (Messrs. Morgan, Bruce and Nicholas) was chary of testing the power of the electric current, although he tried to score a bull's eye and failed, while the agent of the company to whom the machine belonged, scored once and lost twice.

As to the legal aspect of the case, P.S. Hall stated that on Saturday, 18th April, he visited defendant's shop, accompanied by P.C. Richards. On the wall was a penny-in-the-slot machine called "Electric Amuser." There were five young lads around the machine, two of whom placed pennies in the slot without getting a prize. P.C. Richards also placed a penny in the slot, and he failed to get a prize. By placing a coin in it caused an electric contact, which gave the player an electric shock. When he released the handle the penny dropped and released a small ball. By pressing a spring that was shot at great speed, and by chance could fall into one of five compartments. Should it fall into number one or five it returned, and the player had another try. If it fell into two or four, the ball was lost, if in the centre compartment a cheque was released entitling the player to goods at the counter of the face-value of the cheque, which ranged from 2d., 4d., 6d., and 1s. Witness told defendant he was of opinion that it was clearly a game of chance, and asked him why he allowed it on the premises after witness' caution. He replied, "The people will pay." When served with the summons Babinato Antonio explained the machine, and said that 34s. 6d. had been taken from the machine during the week succeeding witness's visit.

Mr. Parry (Messrs. Morgan, Bruce, and Nicholas): Is there any limit to the time the electric shock lasts ? — I don't know; I don't think a man can hold it long.

But if a man is able the shock would continue till the battery is exhausted ? — I don't know.

Can you manipulate the ball by different pressures of the lever ? — I don't think that affects it much.

Does it make any difference how he presses it ? — My experience is that when the lever is pressed, the player has no control over the ball.

The machine was brought to the solicitor's table, and there manipulated by the witness. A penny was placed in the slot, the shock received, and the ball released. The sergeant's attempt got him a bull's eye and a cheque, and Mr. Parry said he would leave the test at that. The sergeant, however, secured another cheque with a second attempt.

Continuing cross-examination, Mr. Parry asked whether the sergeant knew that the amount extended in cheques was more than half the amount of the takings ? — Witness: I can't say.

For the defence, Mr. Parry said that one did not want to go into the law fully. Provided there was some skill it was taken out of the category of a game of chance. No proceedings had been taken in the High Court regarding that particular machine. There were two features in it, one of which was an electric battery. By putting a penny in the player got his full pennyworth of electric current, and could hold on for half an hour if he could and desired to. He submitted that the electricity was the main feature, and therefore there was no element of gaming. The superintendent had objected to a man he called, an expert, testing the machine, and that knocked the bottom out of the case because if a man could be an expert it must be a game of skill. Justice Scrutton had held that a machine — different to the one in this particular case — provided for a game of skill, and on the case going to the Court of Appeal, the decision was upheld. He proposed asking them to say there was involved in the game a scintilla of skill. Lord Justice Vaughan Williams held that there was more than a scintilla of skill in the game, and thought the amount of skill ought to be taken into consideration.

A representative of the machine company said no legal proceedings, with the exception of a case at Boston and one at Abercynon, which were dismissed, had been taken. There were no cheques of a greater value than 2d. The player could have the electric current as long as he liked, and could hold on. The person who put a penny in got the full value of that penny in electric shock. It was optional for a person to play the ball. He could leave it if he cared to, and some did.

The Bench decided that this was a game of chance, and imposed a fine of £1 in each case. Mr. Parry said the Bench would realise that it was an important matter for the makers of the machine and he took it the Bench would be prepared to state a case.

A second summons — against Antonio Coleaqui — was adjourned, and it was stated that the machines must not be used in the meantime.

Annie Darton, licensee of The Goat pub, 182 Park Street; William G. Cooper, of The Chequers, 112 Park Street; and William Edward Foxley, of The Panama, 34 Waller Street, were summoned at Luton Borough Sessions for allowing gaming to be carried on in their respective licensed premises.

Town Clerk William Smith said the prosecutions were taken under Section 79 of the Licensing Consolidation Act 1910. The charge was not so much with reference to unlawful gaming as allowing gaming to be carried on the premises.

Mrs Darton, who succeeded her husband as licensee of The Goat in December 1902, had an "electric amuser" machine installed. A label on it indicated that, being a patent, it had passed the scrutiny of Crown officials, and was in conformity with the law. The label also said there was no danger attached to its use but it provided "a great tonic, cured headache, rheumatism, neuralgia and nervousness" using electric treatment.

The modus operandi, said the Town Clerk, was to place a penny in the aperture at the top. Immediately there commenced a buzzing noise and when the right-hand handle was turned a needle swung round on an indicator. When it reached a certain point the buzzing ceased and a ball fell into position and, if used correctly, the player received an electric shock. Then if the ball ran down certain holes it produced checks in the value from 2d to a shilling - or nothing. There was no guarantee what the winner was going to receive.

Mr H. W. Lathom, defending, said the penny in the slot was merely to pay for the electricity, the ball was a secondary consideration, given free, for amusement only. He objected to the word "lost" if no check emerged, the user had merely received nothing for his penny. The machines, he pointed out, would be perfectly legal in a confectioner's shop or at a church bazaar.

The Town Clerk described the cases as a most feeble and transparent device to legalise a machine which in a public house was contrary to law.

Mr Lathom pointed out that a Judge of Appeal, sitting as the Chairman of a Divisional Court, had contended that having paid for the electricity, it was not gaming to use the machine.

Each licensee was fined 30 shillings, with costs of 7 shillings in two cases and £1 8s in the case of The Goat. Mr Lathom said there would be an appeal by The Goat.

It seems that magistrates were keen to convict on any hint of gambling. In another case, Harry Rogers, a youth, was charged with having games with cards in Barber's Lane on September 29th. He pleaded guilty and was fined 7s, including costs. He was allowed 14 days in which to pay.

https://www.worldwar1luton.com/blog-entry/dont-gamble-law

[bryans fan]

Found in my saved pictures from the web, not my machines.

[pennymachines]

Monarch Automatic Company's Electra with its Bull's eye target and moving pointer was an early (perhaps first) incarnation of the allwin shocker, and was therefore the first to be challenged by the authorities (as above). Clearly it was found wanting, but it didn't prevent other manufacturers from trying the same.
Monarch was also adding shockers to Mills bandits, and perhaps this ruse was their innovation.

The special pleading here is really quite ingenious, even the 'Monarch' company name seems contrived to confer a sense of royal approval.

This Apparatus being a Patented Article has passed the Scrutiny of the CROWN OFFICIALS and is in Conformity with the Law

As mentioned in the Luton case, it claimed to supply a great tonic, "cures headache, rheumatism, neuralgia and nervousness" but also says, "No Shock, No Danger." They really did want to have their cake and eat it. To my mind electric shocks are more cause of nervousness than cure.

[john t peterson]

Here is another one. It's attractively done but looks to be a knockoff from the original.

The top flash is obviously an aftermarket addition. It still provides a nasty little bite.

J Peterson
Thrice bitten in the USA

[widget2k4]

Well I finally got 'round to getting my electric amuser fully functional. What a bloody kick it gives you lol. I can't see what anyone got out of that for fun haha and I'm only running a 4v battery. Is there a way to reduce the shock? There's a hollow tube coming out of the cylinder that creates the electric shock but it doesn't seem to do anything?

I cleaned it up a bit as well. I know not everyone likes them not original but the green material was rotten and falling to bits.

So for those that are interested:

[wembleylion]

Hi Widget,

Congratulations on the super job you have done on the Amuser.

Normally moving the hollow tube in and out of the coil decreases and increases the power of the shock, although I remember that on some medical machines there were two wiring terminals: one that worked with the tube and the other was at max power; sometimes a two position leaf switch or brass link was used. If your tube does nothing, perhaps it is wired to max power all the time. Is there a spare wire coming off the coil, or a switch or brass link that might change the coil output to one of the terminals?
Dropping the input voltage will reduce the power output so the power will drop as the battery becomes discharged.

Hope this helps. John

[widget2k4]

Thanks John

Looks like the tube is fixed and has been fixed in the current position since it was made? So maybe that's the correct current. I know I can't hold onto the handles though haha. I can see the wire that goes to the tube part but doesn't change if I pull it in and out.

[wembleylion]

Hi Widget,

Looking at your photos none of my ideas above are the solution so the only thing I can think is that the battery voltage is too high and it is overwhelming the control rod; it might be worth trying a lower voltage battery.

In your very first photo at the start of this topic I thought that the way the battery box was wired with a terminal on the centre line of the box that an old two cell cycle lamp battery (EverReady 800) might have been used; I don't imagine that these are available now but I think, although they are quite large, they were only 3 volts.

John

[widget2k4]

Thanks John, I may have to look at lowering the current then.

Should this part with the arrow be sparking and making an electrical buzzing sound ? because unless it's sparking and buzzing you don't get a shock. Also, I can't get the bulb to light up. The way it works is weird, because when you press the trigger it breaks the circuit to the handles for the shock and you need to insert another coin to activate it again, but as soon as you break the circuit there is no power to the bulb, even when you win.

[badpenny]

Yes the sparking and buzzing is to be expected, although the sparking bit of it is indicative that the juice is a bit high.
You're witnessing the power arcing across the points when the gap opens and closes.

Opening the gap a bit more may slow it down a bit - get your mother-in-law to hold the terminals while you adjust it.

BP

[wembleylion]

Hi Widget,

This is the contact breaker and it has to be adjusted to supply a consistent on/off current to the primary coil; a consistent buzzing is what is required. There are two coils wound concentrically inside each other. In the on position the low voltage primary coil is energised and in the off position the energy is discharges into the secondary coil to give a high voltage output. This is the same principle as petrol car ignition systems.

I think that the bulb would be on a circuit directly from the battery not the high voltage output and would be connected to a switch which also supplies the shocker when the ball is in the winning position.

Looking again at your original photo, the wiring from the battery box goes to the bulb then from the bulb to the bracket that holds the lever. Midway down the lever to the right hand side there is a brass contact that is wired back to the battery box. I a win situation the player turns the handle and the lever is moved to the right and makes contact with the brass strip and the bulb lights.

Unless this had been changed when the shocker was removed then the only way I could see this working is that the supply to the shocker was also taken from this contact and the shock was only available when the lever contacted the brass strip and the bulb was lit. If this is the case the player would need to only rotate the handle until the lamp lit to get his shock then continue the rotation to get his penny back. However that said this doesn't seem to be a very good idea as it could be open to abuse and a flat battery because the shocker is available all the while the lever is in contact with the brass strip, so I presume that there surely must have been some timing device in the circuit, but what

I hope this helps. John

[widget2k4]

Opening the gap a bit more may slow it down a bit, get your mother in law to hold the terminals while you adjust it

Excellent idea

John
The first photo is my other Amuser which has only the battery wired up to the bulb and works fine. This one is complete and I have rewired it exactly as it came off. If you look at the picture, you can see the two ends of the wire which I presumed was to connect to a battery. If I do this, the electric shock feature works fine until you fire the ball, then it breaks the circuit and the bulb won't light. If I don't fire the ball to break the circuit and simulate a win by hand, the bulb lights up, so I can't see how to get both working going off the original wiring, unless they had it wrong. It did not look like it had been touched though?

[gameswat]

If I don't fire the ball to break the circuit and simulate a win by hand, the bulb lights up, so I can't see how to get both working going off the original wiring, unless they had it wrong. It did not look like it had been touched though?

The flaw in your logic here is that in use the player can never win without first firing the ball! There's no "simulating" in an arcade.

[widget2k4]

What I am trying to say is there is no way the bulb will light on a win. It is not possible the way it was wired because once you fire the ball the circuit is broken and electricity is no longer available for the bulb to light, so I don't understand how they would have got the bulb to light on a win.

Unless the bulb is meant to light up as soon as you put in a penny and go off after you fire the ball...

Or is it correct that the bulb lights up on a win