Jefferson’s comments sank without a trace as far as I can tell. It took months to cross the Atlantic and there could have been very few letters to even make it to Madison in Philadelphia.
I did not say Madison was “following” Hamilton quite the contrary since at the time M was more Hamiltonian than Hamilton. He even propose getting rid of states entirely.
Your description of Hamilton’s contribution is a gross distort of the facts. His proposal during his day long speech did not win much support but had the result of pushing the convention closer to the “active” government he knew was necessary for national survival.
His experience as Washington’s right hand man during the war made him realize a stronger Union was necessary as it did most of those who actually fought in the revolution.
Newspapermen were in NO way “rounded up in mass” for any comments. The impact of the Alien and Sedition Acts were WILDLY exaggerated for political purposes by the Democrats and their lying press.
Not only that but Jefferson did the same thing. See the Croswell case in NY which provided Hamilton with his last great court case. He lost but the law on libel was changed so that truth was a defense.
You plainly have a biased view against Jefferson and an equally biased one in favor of Hamilton. That is fine as a matter of personal opinion, but you are also allowing it to distort your interpretation of history and effectively make Jefferson the "villain" to Hamilton's "hero." Both men had plenty of warts to go around, but to cast Hamilton's monarchy speech as anything other than disastrous for him is just plain silly. It discredited him as a hothead for most of the remainder of the convention, and continued to haunt him for the rest of his political career especially after Yates, Martin, and others let word of it slip out to the public.