THE KNOX PLAN THE PARIS PLAN
League formed of all, not a portion, of the nations of the world. Under Article VII it is provided that no state shall be admitted unless it is able to give guaranties of its intention to observe its international obligations and conform to the principles prescribed by the League in regard to it's naval and military forces and armaments.
War to be declared an international crime, and any nation engaging in war, except in self-defense when actually attacked, to be punished by the world as an international criminal. Article XVI provides that should any of the high contracting parties break covenants under Article XII (relating to arbitration) it shall be deemed to have committed an act of war against the League, which undertakes to exercise economic pressure; and it is to be the duty of the executive council to recommend what military or naval force the members of the League shall contribute to be used to protect the covenants of the League.
The Monroe Doctrine to be safeguarded; also our immigration policy and our right to expel aliens. None of these matters is mentioned specifically, but President Wilson has said that the League will "extend the Monroe Doctrine to the whole world" and that domestic and internal questions are not a concern of the League.
Our right to maintain military and naval establishments and coaling stations, and our right to fortify the Panama Canal and our frontiers to be safeguarded. Article VIII says: "The executive council shall also determine for the consideration and action of the several governments what military equipment and armament is fair and reasonable and in proportion to the scale of forces laid down in the program of disarmament, and these limits when adopted shall not be exceeded without the permission of the executive council."
An international court to be empowered by the League to call upon the signatory Powers to enforce its decrees against unwilling states by force, economic pressure, or otherwise. The constitution of the League to provide, however, that decrees against an American Power shall be enforced by the nations of this hemisphere, and decrees against a country of the eastern hemisphere by the Powers of that hemisphere. Article XIV provides for the establishment of a "permanent court of international justice," but its powers are limited to hearing and determining "any matter which the parties recognize as suitable for submission to it for arbitration" under Article XIII.

Team Work. With the plan agreed upon by the speakers, the brief made out, and the material distributed, each speaker can go to work in earnest to prepare his single speech. The best method has been outlined in this book. His notes should be accurate, clear, easily manipulated. His quotations should be exact, authoritative. By no means should he memorize his speech. Such stilted delivery would result in a series of formal declamations. With his mind stocked with exactly what his particular speech is to cover, yet familiar enough with the material of his colleagues to use it should he need it, the debater is ready for the contest.

Manipulating Material. The speakers on a side should keep all their material according to some system. If cards are used, arguments to be used in the main debate might be arranged in one place, material for rebuttal in another, quotations and statistics in still another. Then if the other side introduces a point not anticipated it should be easy to find the refuting or explaining material at once to counteract its influence in the next speech, if it should be disposed of at once. If slips of paper are used, different colors might indicate different kinds of material. Books, papers, reports, to be used should always be within available distance. While a speaker for the other side is advancing arguments the speaker who will follow him should be able to change, if necessary, his entire plan of defense or attack to meet the manœuver. He should select from the various divisions upon the table the material he needs, and launch at once into a speech which meets squarely all the contentions advanced by his predecessor. This instantaneous commandeering of material is likely to be most usual in rebuttal, but a good debater must be able to resort to it at a second's notice.

The First Affirmative Speaker. The first affirmative speaker must deliver some kind of introduction to the contentions which his side intends to advance. It is his duty to be concise and clear in this. He must not use too much time. If the proposition needs defining and applying he must not fail to do it. He must not give the negative the opportunity to explain and apply to its own purposes the meaning of the proposition. He should state in language which the hearers will remember exactly what the issues are. He can help his own side by outlining exactly what the affirmative intends to prove. He may indicate just what portions will be treated by his colleagues. He should never stop with merely introducing and outlining. Every speaker must advance proof, the first as well as the others. If the preliminary statements by the first affirmative speaker are clearly and convincingly delivered, and if he places a few strong, supporting reasons before the judges, he will have started his side very well upon its course of debating. The last sentences of his speech should drive home the points he has proved.

The First Negative Speaker. The first negative speaker either agrees with the definitions and application of the proposition as announced by the first affirmative speaker or he disagrees with them. If the latter, the mere statement of his disagreement is not sufficient. Contradiction is not proof. He must refute the definition and application of the proposition by strong reasoning and ample proof. If his side does not admit the issues as already presented he must explain or prove them away and establish in their place the issues his side sees in the discussion. When the two sides disagree concerning the issues there is a second proposition erected for discussion at once and the argument upon this second matter may crowd out the attempted argument upon the main proposition. To obviate such shifting many schools have the sides exchange briefs or statements of issues before the debate so that some agreement will be reached upon essentials.

In addition to the matters just enumerated the first negative speaker should outline the plan his side will follow, promising exactly what things will be established by his colleagues. If he feels that the first affirmative speaker has advanced proofs strong enough to require instant refutation he should be able to meet those points at once and dispose of them. If they do not require immediate answering, or if they may safely be left for later refutation in the regular rebuttal, he may content himself with simply announcing that they will be answered. He should not allow the audience to believe that his side cannot meet them.

He must not give the impression that he is evading them. If he has to admit their truth, let him frankly say so, showing, if possible, how they do not apply or do not prove all that is claimed for them, or that though they seem strong in support of the affirmative the negative side has still stronger arguments which by comparison refute at least their effect.

The first negative speaker should not stop with mere refutation. If the first affirmative has advanced proofs, and the first negative disposes of them, the debate is exactly where it was at the beginning. The negative speaker must add convincing arguments of his own. It is a good thing to start with one of the strongest negative arguments in the material.