The early Speakers of the US House of Representatives, most historians and political scientists have agreed, aspired only to facilitate legislative business; the office served as an “impartial moderator,” its functions were “largely ceremonial,” and its occupants of no more consequence than a mere “traffic cop.” This article challenges that conclusion by presenting episodes from the tenures of four early Speakers—Jonathan Dayton, Theodore Sedgwick, Nathaniel Macon, and Joseph B. Varnum—to illustrate their contributions to debates that still occupy us today: the relationship between Congress and president; the scope of federal power; the extent of constitutional freedoms; and the functions and limitations of party government. At a moment when scholars are showing renewed interest in the historical mechanics of lawmaking, this article argues for reinserting the Speakership back into the heart of that process, where it has always belonged.

中文翻译：

---

重新思考议长的角色：权力、制度发展与早期美国众议院“公正调解人”的神话

美国众议院早期的议长、大多数历史学家和政治学家都同意，他们只渴望促进立法事务；该办公室充当“公正的主持人”，其职能“主要是仪式性的”，其居住者仅是“交通警察”。本文通过介绍四位早期议长（乔纳森·代顿、西奥多·塞奇威克、纳撒尼尔·梅肯和约瑟夫·B·瓦纳姆）任职期间的插曲来挑战这一结论，以说明他们对今天仍然占据我们的辩论的贡献：国会与总统之间的关系；联邦权力的范围；宪法自由的范围；以及党政的职能和局限。在学者们对立法的历史机制重新表现出兴趣的时刻，