The Second Affirmative and Second Negative Speakers. The second affirmative and the second negative speakers have very much the same kind of speech to make. Taking the immediate cues from the preceding speaker each may at first pay some attention to the remarks of his opponent. Here again there must be quickly decided the question already brought up by the first negative speech—shall arguments be refuted at once or reserved for such treatment in rebuttal? When this decision is made the next duty of each of these second speakers is to advance his side according to the plan laid down by his first colleague. He must make good the advance notice given of his team.
Each position of a debater has its peculiar tasks. The middle speaker must not allow the interest aroused by the first to lag. If anything, his material and manner must indicate a rise over the opening speech.
He must start at the place where the first speaker stopped and carry on the contention to the place at which it has been agreed he will deliver it to the concluding speaker for his side. If this connection among all the speeches of one side is quite plain to the audience an impression of unity and coherence will be made upon them. This will contribute to the effect of cogent reasoning. They will realize that instead of listening to a group of detached utterances they have been following a chain of reasoning every link of which is closely connected with all that precedes and follows.
The Concluding Affirmative Speaker. The concluding affirmative speaker must not devote his entire speech to a conclusion by giving an extensive summary or recapitulation. He must present arguments. Realizing that this is the last chance for original argument from his side he may be assigned the very strongest argument of all to deliver, for the effect of what he says must last beyond the concluding speech of the negative. It would likewise be a mistake for him to do nothing more than argue in his concluding speech. Several persons have intervened since his first colleague outlined their side and announced what they would prove. It is his duty to show that the affirmative has actually done what it set out to do. By amplifying and diminishing he may also show how the negative had not carried out its avowed intention of disproving the affirmative's position and proving conclusively its own. The concluding speech for the affirmative is an excellent test of a debater's ability to adapt himself to conditions which may have been entirely unforeseen when the debate began, of his keenness in analyzing the strength of the affirmative and exposing the weakness of the negative, of his power in impressing the arguments of his colleagues as well as his own upon the audience, and of his skill in bringing to a well-rounded, impressive conclusion his side's part in the debate.
The Concluding Negative Speaker. The concluding negative speaker must judge whether his immediate predecessor, the concluding affirmative speaker, has been able to gain the verdict of the judges. If he fears that he has, he must strive to argue that conviction away. He too must advance proof finally to strengthen the negative side. He must make his speech answer to his first colleague's announced scheme, or if some change in the line of development has been necessitated, he must make clear why the first was replaced by the one the debaters have followed. If the arguments of the negative have proved what it was declared they would, the last speaker should emphasize that fact beyond any question in any one's mind. Finally he should save time for a fitting conclusion. This brings the debate proper to a close.
Restrictions in Rebuttal. In rebuttal—if it be provided—the main restrictions are two. The speeches are shorter than the earlier ones. No new lines of argument may be introduced. Only lines of proof already brought forward may be considered. Since the speeches are shorter and the material is restricted there is always the disposition to use rebuttal speeches for refutation only. This is a mistake. Refute, but remember always that constructive argument is more likely to win decisions than destructive. Dispose of as many points of the opponents as possible, but reiterate the supporting reasons of your own. Many speakers waste their rebuttals by trying to cover too many points. They therefore have insufficient time to prove anything, so they fall back upon bare contradiction and assertion. Such presentations are mere jumbles of statements. Choose a few important phases of the opposing side's contention. Refute them. Choose the telling aspects of your own case. Emphasize them.
Manner in Debating. Be as earnest and convincing in your speeches as you can. Never yield to the temptation to indulge in personalities. Recall that other speakers should never be mentioned by name. They are identified by their order and their side, as "The first speaker on the affirmative" or "The speaker who preceded me," or "My colleague," or "My opponent." Avoid using these with tones and phrases of sarcasm and bitterness. Be fair and courteous in every way. Never indulge in such belittling expressions as "No one understands what he is trying to prove. He reels off a string of figures which mean nothing." Never indulge in cheap wit or attempts at satiric humor.
Prepare so adequately, analyze so keenly, argue so logically, speak so convincingly, that even when your side loses, your opponents will have to admit that you forced them to do better than they had any idea they could.