In defense of John Jay: what makes somebody a "key Founder"?

In his post below on John Jay, Jon states that John Jay was not one of the "key" Founders.  I respectfully disagree on that point.  If one takes even a cursory look at Jay's career, I think he fits the bill.

Just take a look at some of Jay's outstanding and critically important achievements:

• President of the Continental Congress
• Diplomat (both during the Revolution and during the Washington administration -- the Jay Treaty with Britain is named after him)
• Co-author of The Federalist Papers (with Hamilton and Madison)
• First Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court
• Governor of New York
• Key mover behind New York's move for the gradual abolition of slavery in the 1790s

Now, if Jon wants to argue that Jay wasn't key in the same way that Washington was key, I would agree with him.  Nobody was as important as Washington when it came to the success of both the American Revolution and the early American Republic.  However, the Washington standard is one that very few of the Founders -- even the "top tier" Founders -- could meet.  Maybe Jefferson could meet the Washington standard, but even with Jefferson it would be something of a stretch. 

And while Jay may legitimately be excluded from the list of the "top tier" Founders, he still had a key role to play in both the success of the Revolution and the life of the early Republic at both the state and federal level.  And he was a leader in the early effort to acknowledge the full humanity of African-Americans in our country (something that can't be said about several of the "top tier" Founders like Jefferson and Madison).

He was a key Founder.