[justshutupandtakeit]

As usual, Jefferson's rhetoric does not measure up to his actions. He had no problem with state prosecution of Federalist newspapers when they were critical of his administration. George Clinton, his ally and 2d VP, prosecuted the editor of a newspaper for criticizing TJ. Hamilton's masterful defense led to the NY law being changed.

Not only was the press not protected from State action but the states often established state churches. Jefferson's own state did so, to his mortification. Mass. had an established church, the Congregational, funded by taxpayers. States fined people for not attending church and prosecuted many actions which fall under privacy.

Slave states routinely prosecuted anti-slavery speakers, allowed presses to be destroyed even editors killed for speaking against the Slaverocracy. Magazines and newspapers were taken from the federal mails when anti-slavery. So much for freedom of the press and free speech.

Only when the amendments were blanket statements such as "...the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" or such as in the other amendments except for the First did they apply to the states.

[RKV]

Tom was a human. What else is new? I think the majority of the principles in his writing are correct and should provide us guidance. It seems reasonable to read the other founders as well for confirmation. Sorry, but I don't have the time to respond in more detail - whole books have been written on the subject by brighter people than me.
Also...
1) Hamilton won, didn't he?
2)State churches were met with resistance and ultimately disestablished.
3) Suppression of speech doesn't make it right, then or now.
Simply put, my reading of American history is that when one group wants to tyranize another they rationalize it by finding inovative ways to limit the applicability of the BOR - like the way DemocRATs wrote Jim Crow laws to disenfranchise blacks.