Michael Considine
Australian politician
Michael Patrick Considine (c. 26 January 1885 – 2 November 1959) was an Irish-born Australian politician and unionist. He represented the seat of Barrier in the House of Representatives from 1917 to 1922. A controversial figure, Considine was pressured to resign from the Australian Labor Party (ALP). He won in 1919 as an independent before joining the Socialist Labor Party in 1920, but his seat was abolished for the 1922 election and he was defeated in an attempt to transfer to the seat of Darling.
Early life
Considine was born in County Mayo, Ireland, the son of Michael Patrick Considine and Margaret Josephine, née Lowney. He and his mother came to New South Wales in 1890, living first at Kempsey and then at Sydney. He was prominent in the 1908 tramway worker strike, and was a member of the Socialist Federation of Australia, resigning in 1909 after the Broken Hill strike of 1909. In 1910, he was sentenced to six months in gaol after demonstrating against Charles Wade's government and the gaoling of Peter Bowling. After his release, Considine moved to Broken Hill in 1911.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Michael Considine” as australian politician. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the people & ideas register because the source frames it as australian politician. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Chronology provides the most reliable spine for this subject; interpretation should follow only after identities and dates are secure. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6829425. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1885, 1959, 1917 and 1922.
Public reputation and documentary evidence do not always develop together; absence from a summary is not evidence of historical absence. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Michael Considine”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Michael Considine primary sources, Michael Considine archive and Michael research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Michael Considine”?
- Which primary records establish identity, chronology and institutional ties?
- How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Michael Considine” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.