The pompous fake legacy of this Quaker chemical manufacturer became well established and cemented in the area where his company really wrought havoc, pollution and death. Civic society and libraries have disgraced themselves in promoting the philanthropic fable for many years, though people like Carnegie were of the same exact ilk.
I have already exposed the Albright and Wilson families as ones who lived in privilege and position within the framework of the ghastly society of friends- foxhunting scum.
Albright like the Cadbury’s and others of this liberal none religion pushed their capitalist monopolies like drug pushers, combining this with fake philanthropy and interference with the poor for their “betterment”. So many of “the society of friends”, of generational privilege, were eugenicists or sympathetic to its ideals of white supremacy, though they just would not admit openly to this.
Albright appears to have travelled extensively , making racist observations under the guise of a white saviour complex, indeed the ludicrous “100 years of phosphorus making” tomb to this company sets aside a whole chapter telling us how wonderful the Oxford born phossy bore was:
“One cause which especially appealed to him was the betterment of enslaved negroes.”
Apparently he was involved with an organisation called “The National Freedmen’s Aid Union” raising money by tapping up other wealthy whites during The American Civil war- of course nothing to do with him at all as a British citizen, and an independent country. .
It is incredible that this organisation supplied them with the very tools of their enslavement oppression, albeit without chains. The strings attached however cannot have escaped the Quaker emancipators. The so called “freedmen” were only “free” in name, and would have continued to work for their elitist white “masters” on a pittance, perhaps feeling obligation and gratitude. For “Stockholm syndrome” read “freedmen’s syndrome”.
Was this the Quaker motivation for sourcing cheap industrial labour and a devoted loyal workforce, for their industrialist expansion? I believe it to be the motive of people like Arthur Albright.
The “friends” magazine bulletin of the time below show how “generous” Mr Albright was.
spades and hoes, FFS!
Would Arthur have corrected his “freed””friends” and told them to call him “Arthur” if they had called him “Mr Albright” or “boss”? I very much doubt it, because people like him of such privilege never really understand equal in the eyes of God.
“Negroes in Central and East Africa had cause to be grateful to him some twenty-five years later, when he employed with equal success his N.F.A.U methods to secure proper enforcement of the laws made for their protection”
The quixotic narration by Threlfall in this book, and others like him, is well past its sell by date, but unfortunately the interference of the liberal class still persists in a constant aid machine guilt trip. If people in foreign countries could only be “educated” , or “civilised”- even if they don’t want to behave like those in the West, they may become Quaker pygmalions.
…and 400 pages of bullshit
This is the problem I have with these characters from history, held up as white messiahs and industrial philanthropists. With recent events, we have seen commentary on de-platforming those involved in slavery , but do we really need plaudits for characters like Albright and co whose patronising antics were always about “betterment” and establishing “education” or re-education into a Western philosophy in a “society of friends” setting- i.e of white privilege?
Besides his white saviour complex, Albright like his Quaker peers had a “rich saviour complex”, and like all the modern day phoney philanthropists and their insidious involvement in health and vaccinating , (particularly in the third world), foisted such schemes on those of a lower class or earning. But his life was undoubtedly one of wealth and affluence in that he employed servants living within his own household. The census listings for the last 40 years of his life, (he died in 1900) show some interesting observations.
By 1861 he was living in George Street in Birmingham with his wife Rachael and five listed children, including the sadistic animal murderer George. Listed are a cook, a nurse, a nursemaid, and a governess.
By 1881, now aged 70, and still living with the lampit five in the new hive of a pretentious place called “Mariemont” in the posh part of Edgbaston, he had five servants, but just look at the age of William Partridge, just 13 years old!
By 1891 he still had five servants, but a replacement new boy Roger Birch- also 13 years old.
Perhaps this was just the times, but it appears to me that this was no great libertarian, but a child slave labour merchant; it just surprises me that he hadn’t smuggled in a few child Africans into his suitcase to “save” them in working for him, where they would no doubt have had the pleasure of contracting phossy jaw by manufacturing the substance of death for which he is so well known and made so much money.
Other young boys did work at the Albright and Wilson factory in Oldbury at the same period, with the picture of Billy James -“boy gate keeper” from 1896 featured in the company history book.
Standing on a heap of coal slag with poorly fitting clothes and a workhouse ill favoured look.
Who knows what became of young Billy, who can be no older than 11 or 12 in this picture.
If he could get them young, and groom them into his factory methods, perhaps they would make fine young men, and their sons in turn would also be welcomed into the factory fold to preserve the legacy of their “master”. There’s a great deal of money to be made in exploiting the poor, and “the society of friends” knew exactly how to achieve it.
Not sure if this was supposed to be Prometheus (Greek mythology legend who stole fire from the Gods), but why depicted as a young naked boy cherub in the Albright and Wilson company logo? Perhaps only Arthur could tell us?