Note, nothing about exempting poor or needy families from the tax. Also, it wasn't out of concern for struggling farmers. It was out of concern for dwindling revenues. Typical of the abbeville institute, they take a snippet out of context and then weave a web of lies around it.
The abbeville writer wants us to believe the tax-in-kind was discontinued and replaced by a more fair tax. Such is not the case. The February 1864 tax was IN ADDITION TO all the other taxes, NOT INSTEAD OF those other taxes.
You should take a bit more time to look at different sources. The special exemptions are repeated multiple times in this instruction to assessors.
I looked at the source they claimed to use. It doesn't say what they claimed it says.
Look at the date and the title. That's not the February 1864 tax bill. It's the tax in kind. The abbeville writer is still wrong.
Another source. The poor were exempted from the tax in kind law in February of 1864.
https://books.google.com/books?id=-jlxYXeLkJUC&pg=PA206&lpg=PA206&dq=confederate+tax+in+kind+February+1864+relief+to+the+poor&source=bl&ots=jHVo0iGr7t&sig=q36rjuPxi-krS1idPCsbjXIwkXM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjeueKDpe_NAhUIOSYKHVIcDFYQ6AEIYDAH#v=onepage&q=confederate tax in kind February 1864 relief to the poor&f=false
From the Abbeville article:
As for Confederate tax policy, the “tax-in-kind” that required farmers to give ten percent to the government, it was a tough tax in those farm-based areas and there were reports of rough tactics used to collect it. But the film essentially portrayed the Confederate army and tax collectors as barbarians. I was unsure if I was seeing the Confederate army or the first coming of Hitler’s Wehrmacht. One particularly nasty tax-collecting officer, a Lt. Barbour, was also a fictional character.
But the film left out the fact that the Confederate Congress changed the tax several times, including a major change in February 1864 that exempted poor and needy families but also heavily taxed the rich and affluent. One political scientist from Yale wrote that the Confederate Congress, in this new change, “taxed all property including slaves at 5%; all gold, silver, and jewels were taxed at 10%; all shares or interest in banks, companies or businesses were taxed at 5%; monies in any form were taxed at 5%; and taxes on profits were increased to 10%, with companies that made more than a 25% profit taxed at 25%.” And all because of the complaints of, and out of concern for, struggling farmers.
I will go check the source, but the paragraph I've quoted and the bolded items are absolutely factual.
Don't forget that long before the Georgia campaign, it was Grierson's raid through Mississippi that distracted the local forces enough to make possible Grant's Vicksburg campaign.I often wonder why NBF has such a reputation, yet Benjamin Grierson, who played much the same game wearing BLUE, is so little-known. Another example of the South "winning the peace", I suppose. Grierson was a talented cavalryman and an exceptional leader, who was assigned a dirty, dangerous mission to confuse, demoralize, and disrupt Confederate troops and civilians while Billy Sherman made his march to the sea. Postwar, he commanded a regiment of Buffalo Soldiers against the Apache and other southwestern Native Americans with equal success. He proceeded with his missions with little publicity or fuss, never confusing the steak with the sizzle. And of course, he never lent his name for a minute to an untoward and unamerican group or activity....my father was Army for thirty-two years, and his highest statement of praise, (and his method of judgment )was..."he did his job"...Ben Grierson always did...