Featured A List of Grievances and Foreshadowing War

Discussion in 'World Coins' started by Cachecoins, Mar 15, 2020.

  1. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    biel2.jpg

    STADT BIELEFELD (GERMAN) GOLDMARK 1923

    L- 40.5 City Savings Bank of Bielefeld (Westfalen) Gilded Bronze 1 Mark Coin / Post WW I Propaganda / Stab-in-the-Back / Occupation of the Ruhr.

    This coin was issued in 1923 by the city savings bank of the German city of Bielefeld. This outstanding coin exhibits some of the highest levels of craftsmanship and design to be found on notgeld. It is also a wonderful and poignant example of post war propaganda illustrating many of the underlying reasons for continued discontent in Germany after what was seen as a humiliating defeat in World War I.

    biel2obv.jpg

    Obverse: "Michel unbesiegt aber betrogen" (Michel, undefeated but betrayed) / this inscription is repeating what is known as the 'stab-in-the-back' legend, in German it is called the Dolchstoß-Legende. Depicted is a bust right resembling Otto von Bismarck as 'Michel' wearing a sleeping cap inside the one denomination.

    biel2rev.jpg

    Reverse: "Stadt Bielefeld" (City of Bielefeld) / "Einig und gleich, ein Volk, ein Reich" (United and equal, one people, one empire) Depicted as a kneeling devil is President Raymond Poincaré of France whose name is around the tail. Above his head is a verse from the biblical ethical teachings of Ben Sira: "SIRACH 23 VERS 7" (Hear, O ye children, the discipline of the mouth: he that keepeth it shall never be taken in his lips.) The second figure is a Blacksmith leaning on a large hammer and sitting on signs.

    biel2detail3.jpg

    The Blacksmith sits on signs that read:

    "SCHMIED von BIELEFELD" (Forge of Bielefeld) referring to a local tale about a Blacksmith who makes a deal with the Devil

    "SIRACH 30 VERS 12" again referring to a verse in the Book of Sirach (Bow down his neck while he is young, and beat him on the sides while he is a child, lest he wax stubborn, and be disobedient unto thee, and so bring sorrow to thine heart.)

    "MINISTER SEVE" (referring to Minister Carl Wilhelm Severing, a politician during the empire and Weimar Republic) "11.8.1923" (refers to the day when Germany interrupted the reparation payments due to the French-Belgian occupation of the Ruhr area.) "Ruhrhilfe" (Ruhr Assistance)

    biel2detail.jpg

    Shield to the right on obverse: "WILSON 14 PUNKTE WAFFENSTILLSTAND 1918" (Wilsons 14 point armistice 1918)

    biel2detail1.jpg

    Below is the word "not" (emergency) above the word "GOLDMARK" (currency of the German Empire from 1873 to 1914), The letters of GOLDMARK are used as initials of "GERMANEN LIEBET DEUTSCHLAND MIT ANDACHT REINHEIT KRAFT" (Germans, love Germany with devotion, purity, strength)

    This coin makes a direct reference to President Woodrow Wilson and his 14 point armistice. Germany accepted the moderate terms laid down by Wilson assuming these terms would be the basis for a later treaty. They signed an armistice on Nov. 11, 1918. The resulting Treaty of Versailles went far beyond the moderate proposals of the Fourteen Points and left a legacy of bitterness, resentment, and recrimination among the Germans.

    The situation was grim. Soldiers were defeated and felt betrayed by their government as they were forced to give up a fight many believed they could still win. They blamed a populous whom they felt had not supported the war sufficiently. In reality the people at home had greatly suffered for the war. Worker strikes had hampered efforts though such strikes were the direct result of a faltering economy and severe shortages of even the most basic needs for survival. Life in Germany at this time had, for most, become a day to day struggle to survive.

    Wilson's 14 points:

    • No secret diplomacy
    • Freedom of Navigation on the Seas
    • No international barriers to trade and equality of trade
    • Reduction of national armament
    • Impartial adjustment of colonial claims and disputes
    • Evacuation of Russian territory with self-determination
    • Evacuation and restoration of Belgian sovereignty
    • Restoration of French sovereignty
    • Adjustment of the Italian frontiers
    • Autonomy for the population of Austria- Hungary
    • Evacuation and restoration of the Balkan nations and peoples
    • The internationalization of the Dardanelles
    • Independence for Poland with guaranteed access to the sea
    • The creation of a League of Nations


    The Treaty of Versailles covered all this and more. Germany lost all its colonies and many of its European holdings and their army could be no larger than 100,000 men. This force was virtually powerless as Germany could not manufacture, import, or export weapons. Tanks, submarines, military aircraft, and artillery were all banned.

    Germany was forced to take full responsibility for the war, as such they were forced to pay reparations to the tune of hundreds of billions of marks. Said reparations would be paid in gold and natural resources. The German Empire would be dismantled, a republic would replace it (Weimar) and the Emperor Wilhelm II would be tried as a war criminal.

    The inscription "Michel unbesiegt aber betrogen" (Michel, undefeated but betrayed) is referring to the Dolchstoßlegende (Dagger stab legend). This is the popularly held belief that the reasons for the German defeat in World War I was betrayal and sabotage through insufficient support by the government, politicians, the workers, industrial concerns, war profiteers, Jews and Communists.

    It stemmed from the idea that German forces were not defeated on the battlefield but on the home front. It was believed that German forces were still willing and able to defend Germany but were betrayed by a lack of support at crucial moments. They were 'Undefeated but Betrayed".

    They blamed industrialists who did not support the war enough or looked to make a profit. Certainly in any war there are profiteers but eventually industry was being expected to produce without pay, let alone profit. This led to workers not being paid, shortages, and general economic and social turmoil and unrest. They blamed the new leaders of the Weimar Republic who betrayed Germany and the troops by giving up and taking the blame for the war in exchange for positions of power. Those who would become known as the "The November Criminals". They blamed the Jews, Marxists, and Revolutionaries who had connections outside of Germany. They were thought to have plotted against the empire and sought to sabotage the war effort. Jews were accused of not having joined the war effort. Although some did openly oppose the war, many more thousands of Jews fought and died on the battlefield. In truth a large amount of the Jewish population supported the war in one way or another.

    Michel refers to the personification of the average German first used in literature as far back as the 16th century. It was often used later (early 19th century) in cartoons. It is a some what ambiguous stereotype - partly sleepyhead or dope, partly "common man" who simply wants to live his life without being bothered by the government which in those days was authoritarian. You still find Michel with his night cap on in today's political cartoons. In German the word "Schlafmütze" means night cap but it can also mean sleepyhead.

    In this case Michel may also refer to the code name given to the first push in a series of major offensives launched by Germany in March of 1918 called the 'Spring Offensive'. This offensive saw some of the most intense fighting of the war. German forces were initially successful in breaking through enemy lines, in many cases sending allied forces in retreat. In the end it proved fruitless, the territory was unable to be held against counterattack due in a large part to difficulty keeping the advance troops supplied.

    Germany lost large amounts of veteran troops, as had the allies. German morale hit a new low when it became apparent the push had not achieved a decisive victory. After several more pushes ended with similar results, the German armies were severely depleted, exhausted and in exposed positions. Allied forces had suffered heavy losses and had lost some ground but in the end they were better supplied by fresh American troops ready to fight. They weathered the German advances and soon launched the Hundred Days Offensive which effectively ended the war.

    Although there were certainly tactical mistakes made on the field. The failure of German troops to capitalize on their momentum was largely blamed on a lack of material support. Eventually this offensive would serve as proof that German forces had not been defeated by the enemy but by the inability, or worse unwillingness, of the populous to support the war effort. The failure was largely blamed on strikes in the arms industry at a critical moment of the offensive, leaving soldiers without adequate supplies. The strikes were seen to be instigated by treasonous elements, with the Jews taking much of the blame.

    Whether Germany was defeated in late 1918 is debatable. They still occupied French and Belgian territory, Berlin remained 450 miles from the nearest front. Though poorly supplied, German armies were still largely in in good order with well over 4 million men still in service. No Allied army had penetrated the Western Front. Although better supplied with fresh troops from America, the French and British were war-weary and seemed unable to gather the strength to launch a full fledged invasion of Germany.

    Regardless, the reality was that Germany had little choice but to capitulate. By late 1918, in the course of 3 months, most of Germanys allies had quit the war and sought terms with the Allied Forces.

    In the bitter end the Dolchstoßlegende was Germanys answer to the so called 'War Guilt' clause in the Treaty of Versailles. This stated that Germany was solely responsible for the war, something not believed to be true by most Germans. Those who agreed to the Treaty were considered traitors who had 'stabbed Germany in the back' by capitulating. People like Matthias Erzberger, part of the temporary civilian government that sued for peace. He was later killed as a traitor for having signed the treaty. The reality is that German High Command had made it clear to government officials at home that they could not mount further offensives and they could no longer engage the enemy and urged capitulation and the stab in the back was a way to divert blame for German capitulation.

    The origin of the 'Stab-in-the-back' can possibly be traced back to 1918 when Ernst Müller-Meiningen, a member of the Progressive coalition in the Reich, gave a speech to exhort his listeners to keep fighting:

    As long as the front holds, we damned well have the duty to hold out in the homeland. We would have to be ashamed of ourselves in front of our children and grandchildren if we attacked the battle front from the rear and gave it a dagger-stab. (wenn wir der Front in den Rücken fielen und ihr den Dolchstoss versetzten.)

    Provisional President Friedrich Ebert contributed to this line of thinking when in an 1918 oration to returning troops, he stated that "no enemy has vanquished you" and "they returned undefeated from the battlefield". His purpose in saying this was purely to exalt those men who had fought so bravely for the nation and commend them for their service to the country when they were at a low point.

    General Ludendorff, a chief architect of the war, gave many of these same causes for the German defeat to the British General Frederick Barton Maurice in mid 1919. Maurice is reported saying that it sounded like the German army had been stabbed in the back. Maurice denies having said anything equating to the idea.

    The Weimar National Assembly initiated an investigation into the causes of the war and reasons for Germany's defeat. In late November of 1919, the highly regarded popular hero, Paul von Hindenburg, was called to testify. He quoted what General Maurice had stated, that the German army had been dagger-stabbed from behind by the civilian populace. It was the testimony of Hindenburg that led to the wide spread acceptance of the Dolchstoßlegende in post-WWI Germany.

    Regardless of who said it first, this opinion was already widely held by 1923 when this coin was minted. It had become the central them in right-wing propaganda and conservative political parties during the early Weimer Republic. Those responsible for the proverbial stab were dubbed the 'November Criminals' of 1918. The 'Stab-in-the-back' and the 'November Criminals' would be a major rallying point in the Rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in the years to come.

    biel2detail2.jpg

    The scene on the reverse illustrates a local tale about a blacksmith from Bielefeld co-opted for political satire and propaganda using the French President Raymond Poincaré as the Devil.

    By the time this coin was minted, Germany had suspended reparation payments because of a failing economy. In order to pay off the state's debts, the government under Wilhelm Cuno printed off vast amounts of money leading to hyperinflation which peaked in the summer of 1923. Blame for this would be placed on reparations but the larger fault rested on the governments flawed monetary policies.

    French and Belgian forces occupied the German Ruhr Area in order to take advantage of that areas industry and rich natural resources. This was met with a largely passive resistance from government, business, and the populace. Coal miners and railway workers refused to obey any instructions by the occupation forces. Production and transportation came to a standstill, this led to further economic woes and passive resistance was called off in late 1923. The French, with their own economic problems, eventually accepted the Dawes Plan and withdrew from the occupied areas in 1925.

    The reverse of this coin makes mention of SCHMIED von BIELEFELD or the Smith of Bielefeld) referring to a local tale about a Blacksmith who makes a deal with the Devil. The story is as follows:

    Once upon a time there was a smith in Bielefeld who knew his art like nobody else. In order to become even better and learn all secret arts, he made a pact with the devil. He then became so famous that even St. Peter - who one time had to go down and whose horse had a loose horseshoe - went to him. Asked how much he (Peter) owed, the smith said he did not want any money; however, he said he had a bag that would always lose some money, and asked the apostle to bless the bag. That is what Peter did.

    Some time later the time of the pact with the devil came to its end, and the devil came to get the smith. He knocked at the door, but the smith said he could simply come in through the keyhole. The devil did that but got caught in the bag that the smith held against the keyhole. Then the smith closed the bag, took it to his anvil and hammered until the devil was willing to give up (ie. to not take the smith with him).

    When the smith felt he was about to die, he had his fur apron put on, and when he was dead, went to the heaven's gate. But Peter refused to let him in, due to the former pact with the devil. Then he went to hell, but the devil would not let him in because the smith had beaten him so hard. So the smith went back to heaven and, when Peter opened the gate to let a pious virgin in, he threw his apron in. Peter would not allow that and told the smith to take it out again. However, once inside, the smith sat down on his apron fur and refused to leave. Peter, who remembered that the smith had voluntarily given to the poor, would finally let him stay - where the smith is still sitting today.

    The coin depicts the French President Raymond Poincaré as the Devil and Minister Carl Wilhelm Severing as the Blacksmith. Poincaré was one of the driving forces behind the French-Belgian occupation of the Ruhr area, and Severing supported the opposition against it while at the same time being loyal to the German government. Severing was a locksmith before serving in public office, so in a way he was the "Smith of Bielefeld" of his time.

    This coin conveys a message of defiance in the face of humiliation and betrayal. It also harkens back to better days under the prosperous German Empire calling for German unity with the inscriptions "United and equal, one people, one empire" and "Germans, love Germany with devotion, purity, strength".

    Carl Wilhelm Severing was a popular politician under the empire as well as the new republic. He was a social democrat who was from Herford, near Bielefeld. Originally a locksmith by trade, by the time this coin was minted he was the Interior Minister of Prussia. He is best known for his role in authorizing the rearmament of Germany. His stated reason was the need for more forces to defend against possible attacks and to preserve the peace in the face of widespread social upheaval.

    Bielefeld is a city of roughly 325,000 people in North Rhine-Westphalia, on both the western and eastern slopes of the Teutoburg Forest. Bielefeld is an urban district meaning it is one of the 116 cities that represent a district in their own right.

    After its founding in 1214 by Count Hermann IV, the town grew into a fortified city known for producing fine linen. Administration of the city changed hands many times through the years until the Kingdom of Prussia gained possession of it after the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars in the early 19th century. The railroad reached Bielefeld in the mid 19th century, with it came industrialization in the form of mills and metal works and a steady rise in population.

    By World War I, Bielefeld had entered the war as a part of the German Empire. Bielefeld was an important industrial base helping to supply the German war effort. In the end, the city was not spared the attrition and economic turmoil that plagued Germany during and after the war.


    After the war Bielefeld became one of the more prolific producers of notgeld. Often referred to as the 'City of Linen', Bielefeld issued an extensive and popular series of high denomination notes printed on silk, linen, and velvet during post war and hyperinflation. They also minted a variety of coins, some with strong political themes. Many thanks to Christian from www.cointalk.org for his help with translation.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. furryfrog02

    furryfrog02 Well-Known Member

    Did I read this yesterday or am I hallucinating?
    Either way, this is a great write up and a beautiful "coin". Thank you for sharing.
     
  4. Zebmonster

    Zebmonster Member

    Very interesting. Thank you for posting.
     
  5. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    I just posted the coin without the write-up. But yes, you saw the coin yesterday. :) Thanks
     
    furryfrog02 likes this.
  6. kaparthy

    kaparthy Well-Known Member

    Outstanding scholarship! You should submit this to a magazine and get paid for it.
     
    Spark1951 and Cachecoins like this.
  7. panzerman

    panzerman Well-Known Member

    Beautifull coin, informative history Probably would have been better in long run to not have surrendered. The Russians where out of the War. The British/ French would have lacked the will to continue. The War in November 1918 was same as July 1944 in WW2. However no Eastern Front to defend. Had the Kaiser pulled forces out of occupied Countries, Wilson would have agreed to sign a truce.
     
  8. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    From my research I do not believe the Germans could have stood up to another offensive and the high command knew this. Although it was they who would blame the civilian government for the loss, it was they who also told that government they absolutely could not withstand another offensive and urged the government to sue for immediate ceasefire.
     
    buckeye73 and panzerman like this.
  9. Oldhoopster

    Oldhoopster Member of the ANA since 1982

    I have an example of this notgeld and did a little research to understand the meaning a few years ago. I wish you would have published your post prior to my research. The write-up is excellent. I though I knew enough about the piece to understand the story. I was mistaken.

    Once again, well done. I learned a lot from it.
     
    Spark1951 and panzerman like this.
  10. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    Thank you very much, I truly appreciate the kind words.
     
    panzerman likes this.
  11. Charles Riley

    Charles Riley Welsh-language medal collector and numismatist

    Excellent article, very informative.
     
    panzerman likes this.
  12. Razz

    Razz Critical Thinker

    So in reality there was no stab in the back. They lost the war on the battlefield and at home. They were bitter about the hardship that comes with losing and rationalized the loss by projecting it onto other folks, including the jews? Did I sum that up correctly?
     
    Pellinore likes this.
  13. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    To be honest it is a bit more nuanced than that but that is roughly the case.

    The Germans had just had a rather successful offensive that they could not defend because of exhaustion and lack of supplies. They were then hit with a counter offensive that left them on the brink of colapse.

    They still had several million in service, cycling front to fight and back to work in factories. If they had supplies they probably could have continued that war but their lack of supplies was not the fault of those they blamed but just a natural consequence of blockades and sanctions.

    There was some civil unrest in the populous, mainly because of severe shortages combined with the expectation of prolonged labor without pay. It should be noted that a growing communist presence in Germany, which would fight for control of Germany after the war, was a factor and probably did share blame.

    I would say that if they had resources and could supply troops and provide for those at home. They may have been able to hold out a little longer but without doubt they would have been alone and isolated with no allies or trade against the rest of a weary but resolute Europe and a relatively fresh U.S. contingent.
     
    Orielensis, Chris B and panzerman like this.
  14. Bardolph

    Bardolph Active Member

    Excellent article! Just one minor criticism, it's populace, not populous
     
  15. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    Unfortunately I cannot edit it. Looks like I used it once in the article and in my reply above. I do know the difference. :(
     
  16. Spark1951

    Spark1951 Accomplishment, not Activity

    @Cachecoins ...Outstanding essay. Well done. Very interesting and beautiful Goldmark.

    I read the book by Christopher Clark last year: Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went To War in 1914, seeking the underlying causes of the War. My biggest take-away was the politicians of the time ALL had massive egos. No one was willing to conduct honest diplomacy and many prevaricated to save face. Coupling that scenario to the combustible fervor of nationalism led everyone to Sarajevo.

    Your article really nails it down on the causes of the ending of the War, it helps fill some gaps for me understanding the aftermath of the Treaty of Versailles.

    Once again, Outstanding work. Kudos...Spark
     
    panzerman likes this.
  17. panzerman

    panzerman Well-Known Member

    Good point....
    It was Versailles that led to next War. Remember back in 1815/ Treaty of Vienna. The Allies/ Prussia/ Austro-Hungary/ Russia/ Great Britain did not seek to humilate France. They wanted a lasting peace. Many of the art works in Louvre where looted by the French/ which where never returned to rightfull owners. Versailles on the extreme other end, sought to destroy Austro-Hungary/ Germany. They took territories away/ Colonies/ impossible reparations/ failing to see that it would destroy their economies/ lead to chaos. Lenin added to the problems by sending Communists agents in to ferment Red takeovers. If the Allies had implemented a "Vienna" style Peace, history would have been changed for the better.
     
    Spark1951 likes this.
  18. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    Yes, He had a great point about the total failure of diplomacy. At any point in the lead up it could have been easily avoided, or if nothing else relegated to a localized conflict. However it wasn't the politicians at the root cause but the nature of Germany at the time, those who ruled and what they valued.

    Germany as a relatively unified entity was quite new at the time. Most German states had been loosely aligned by their membership in the Holy Roman Empire, ruled almost exclusively by the Habsburgs for a very long time. But the Holy Roman Empire was actually just a loose conglomeration of many autonomous German states ruled by hereditary princes who interacted with each other through an intricate system of alliances. After the fall of the HRE there was a new grouping called the German Confederation, the precursor to the German Empire. Here is a list of those monarchs close to the formation of the German Empire:

    [​IMG]

    Austria, Kingdom of Prussia, Kingdom of Bavaria, Kingdom of Hannover, Kingdom of Württemberg, Kingdom of Saxony, Grand Duchy of Baden, Grand Duchy of Hesse-Darmstadt, Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, Principality of Liechtenstein, etc...at this time about 39 monarchs that ruled over their own domains. Each one hereditary, each one raised to be a ruler, each one wearing military uniforms, big medals, carrying swords and members of royal societies, knights, etc...They grew up as princes and they learned about their ancestors and how they led men into glorious war...Even under the Empire they demanded autonomy or semi-autonomy, the larger states holding on to more of it, the smaller ones giving away more autonomy but still keeping their right to rule their own domains.

    Here is Wilhelm II, son of the first emperor who ruled during the war and, who as a child played war with his toy soldiers and dreamed of the day when he would lead his loyal men into battle:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The point I am making is that in Germany and Austria you had a dangerous mix of royalty who dreamt of the glories of war mixed with industrialization, greater technology and more deadly weapons. After the work of Otto von Bismarck (you have to respect the man) there was now a much more unified Germany who now had proof, after the Franco-Prussian war, that a unified Germany was unstoppable. You also had a very new and growing German nationalism. Now people were starting to see themselves as Germans more than Bavarian, Hessian or Prussian. It is my belief that these men were going to go to war no matter what. They had already planned their victory down to the slightest details (Schlieffen plan). France, already war weary, had already been building defenses in the hopes of slowing the inevitable attack by a unified, militarized and motivated Germany.

    These are the egos you speak of. Diplomacy could have stopped it at any point if there was any will to do so but Austria had a pact with Germany and Germany took the opportunity to take charge of the Balkan issue, lines were drawn and the war began. Anyone who reads the diplomatic letters and events leading up to the war can only conclude there was no will to on the part of the men who pranced around in their uniforms weighted down by numerous medals to come to terms.

    [​IMG]

    Unfortunately old Chancellor Bismarck, the man behind the unification, master diplomat and manipulator could not control the younger Wilhelm as he did his old father. He had fought man battles, helped unify and empower Germany turning it into a technologically advanced, wealthy, powerful nation and attempted to make and keep peace through a complex web of treaties and alliances but in the end, he lost control. He opposed the sabre rattling and at every turn butted heads with Wilhelm who eventually forced his resignation. His stabilizing influence gone, war was inevitable. He predicted disaster, a little before his death he said:

    "One day the great European War will come out of some foolish damned thing in the Balkans." :)
     
  19. Magnus Maximus

    Magnus Maximus Dulce et Decorum est....

    I am not familiar with the food situation in 1944 Germany, but I would guess that it was considerably better than in November 1918 Germany. The Royal Navy's blockade of Germany is often over looked but played a vital role in starving the Germans into submission during WW1. Don't quote me but I believe I heard somewhere that by the end of the war the average German solider was getting less than 1500 calories a day. Also, with starvation comes increased susceptibility to disease( Tuberculosis, Influenza, Diphtheria)
     
    panzerman likes this.
  20. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    Without a doubt completely isolating Germany from any import and export was a major factor in their defeat. It hurt both moral back home and on the front it left German troops poorly equipt and hungry.
     
    panzerman likes this.
  21. Cachecoins

    Cachecoins Historia Moneta

    I did my senior thesis on post WWI Germany, not just the financial problems and social and political unrest but also the arts and entertainment that was rather wild. There was an artist by the name of Otto Dix who joined the army, like many others, taken by a sense of national pride and he spent a lot of time in the trenches. When he came back he painted and drew his experience both in the war and what he saw after. Many wounded men lost and dazed. He was a major force in what was label the New Objectivity movement.

    He only did work like this for a short time, he painted interesting portraits or street and bar screens as well. details from one of his best known works about his time at the front is below, a large, very detailed tryptic called The War:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    And after the war:

    [​IMG]
    War Cripples 1920

    [​IMG]
    Mutated soldiers trying to play cards in The Skat Players 1920

    [​IMG]

    Self Portrait

    All images linked
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page