The interesting thing about you highlighting the 17th item, which seems to mirror the takings clause of the 5th Amendment, is that their similarity probably ends with the language - the French provision was a reaction to a very specific old regime abuse - the taking of property by the Church and the nobility - rather than an ideal of the manner in which property rights would be secured. It is important to note that, with their background in a feudal society, the French had a very different conception of private property than did the Americans.
I actually did a research paper on this topic in grad school. My conclusion was that, while some provisions in the DRMC were directly influenced by corresponding provisions in the Bill of Rights, the property provision was completely unrelated to the takings clause.
Well, it couldn't have been much given the hauteur of the French, and the fact that Jefferson couldn't speak (fluent) French.
No, in this regard Jefferson, IMHO, was more like a love-smitten school boy, for he was there to see only the beginning of the Revolution when it was still brights and shinning...and for the rest of his life refused to admit that it ever had a darker side. Sort of like early-mid 20th c. American communists and USSR.