After Joseph Fourestier Simpson invented and then received his patent for Skee-Ball on December 8, 1908, he made a deal with John W. Harper and William Nice Jr. to build, sell and promote the game. Harper and Nice set up a company named the “Skee-Ball Alley Company,” which initially operated out of an office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Harper built and marketed the alleys, while Nice was supposed to be the “deep pockets” investor. These original alleys came with a scoring device and coin box. The coin box took nickel sized coinage, including tokens. Harper had tokens made specifically for the Skee-Ball Alley Company.
Although the token has the name of the company as the “Skee-Ball Co.” on the token, the address is the same as Harper’s corporate address in Philadelphia, 533 Chestnut Street. Presumably they couldn’t fit the full name of the company on the token and abbreviated it, as they did with the city name, “Philada.”
On the back of the token, it states the obvious: “Good For One Game Skee-Ball.”
The coin box feature was terrific for operators and revolutionary for the arcade games at the time time, eliminating the need for an attendant to hand out balls and take coins. But Harper had no end of trouble setting up the coin box. In August of 1910, he wrote in a letter to Simpson:
Dear Simpson,
I enclose you 2 different kind of keys for coin boxes. I am sure 1 opens the box I set out to put on alley. I do not think you will have any trouble in adjusting box as I have had all the trouble a person could have adjusting it when it was first placed. When they come to move [the] alley, remember the screw into the floor at tapered end of trough.
And this coin box, along with the integrated ball release, was about to make history.
Token Specs.
Size: 21mm
Composition: Brass
Shape: Round
About the author:
Thaddeus Cooper is the co-author of Seeking Redemption: The Real Story of the Beautiful Game of Skee-Ball, a deep dive into the history of the game. You can find more information about Thaddeus, and his co-author, and their book, at: http://www.nomoreboxes.com/.
Simpson received Townsend’s letter of April 20, 1908 and seems to have been stunned into silence.
Whether he perceived Townsend’s attempt at humor it was clear that claim 1 was not going to be granted no matter what he did to try and rewrite it. Townsend was not having it.
Simpson had started the patent process back in November 1907 with great hope and seven claims:
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a projectile is adapted to travel, an obstruction upon said board for causing said projectile to be projected into the tair in a direction which will be a continuation of its original movement, and a target in the line of the trajectory of said projectile.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a projectile is adapted to travel, an obstruction for trajecting said projectile, and a perforated target in the line of the trajectory of said projectile.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a ball is adapted to be rolled, an obstruction for trajecting said ball, a target in the line of the trajectory of the ball, and an inclined base or floor for returning the ball to the player after it has been played.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a ball is adapted to be rolled, an obstruction for trajecting said ball, a target in the line of the trajectory of said ball, and an indicator for showing the part of said target engaged by the ball.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a projectile is adapted to travel, an obstruction for trajecting said projectile, a target in the line of the trajectory of said projectile, screens for limiting side movements of said projectile, and an inclined base for returning said projectile to the player.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which said ball is adapted to be rolled, an obstruction for trajecting said ball, inclined gutters to the sides of said board, an inclined base to the rear of and leading to said gutters, a target, and screens for limiting side movements of said ball.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a projectile is adapted to be rolled, an obstruction for trajecting said projectile, a perforated taget in the line of the trajectory of said projectiles, pivoted levers connected with said perforations adapted to be engaged and depressed by the projectile after passing through said perforations, and an indicating device adapted to be operated by the movement of said levers.
By April 1908, those claims were whittled away at until Simpson only had two claims left, The ski jump obstruction, and the lever in the target to register the score.:
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a projectile is adapted to travel, an apertured target at the rear of and above said board, in front of and spaced from said target, adapted to cause said ball to leave said board and continue its flight towards said target in the air.
In a game apparatus, in combination, a board along which a projectile is adapted to be rolled, an obstruction for trajecting said projectile, an elevated apertured target at the rear of and spaced from said obstruction, pivoted levers arranged in said apertures adapted to be engaged and operated by the projectile after passing through said apertures, and an indicating device adapted to be operated by the movement of said levers.
It is reasonable to believe that Simpson would be angry and depressed at this point. It was clear that the Patent Office did not understand the brilliance of the invention and how all the pieces fit together to make a game that would fascinate players. And, it was even more obvious that he was not going to be able to change their minds, no matter how adamant he was.
Simpson finally came to terms with the situation and decided a patent with some form of protection was better than no patent and he finally gave up. He wrote his response on May 4, 1908, stating:
Sir:-
In the matter of my application for patent on Game No 401,786, filed November 12, 1907 and in answer to Examiners [sic] letter dated April 20, 1908, I hereby amend my specification by striking out Claim 1.
Very respectfully
Joseph F. Simpson
And once again, Joseph Fourestier Simpson waited.
Letter from Joseph Fourestier Simpson to the US Patent Office, May 4, 1908.
About the author:
Thaddeus Cooper is the co-author of Seeking Redemption: The Real Story of the Beautiful Game of Skee-Ball, a deep dive into the history of the game. You can find more information about Thaddeus, and his co-author, and their book, at: http://www.nomoreboxes.com/.
On December 8, 1908, Joseph Fourestier Simpson’s patent for Skee-Ball was finally published, and his patent protection began. After arguing for months with the US Patent office over the broad claims he wanted protection for, he finally acquiesced, and accepted that he was only going to get two of the claims through. The first was for the ski-jump that launched the ball into the air, and the second was for the lever that actuated the scoring device. But these were enough to get the ball rolling.
He gave one half interest in the patent to William Nice Jr. a wealthy retired lumberman in exchange for his financial backing. Nice and John W. Harper started the Skee-Ball Alley Company in Philadelphia to build and market the game.
Simpson had no idea what the game of Skee-Ball was really going to cost him.
US Patent 905,941 • Page 1
US Patent 905,941 • Page 2
US Patent 905,941 • Page 3
US Patent 905,941 • Page 4
US Patent 905,941 • Page 5
US Patent 905,941 • Page 6
About the author:
Thaddeus Cooper is the co-author of Seeking Redemption: The Real Story of the Beautiful Game of Skee-Ball, a deep dive into the history of the game. You can find more information about Thaddeus, and his co-author, and their book, at: http://www.nomoreboxes.com/.
