Talleyrand is remarkable for his cold sarcasms. When M. de Narbonne was Minister at War, Mde. de Staël was his protecting mistress, she guided everything; and one day at a Council of War, at which, very improperly, she was present, each Minister gave their opinion upon the different projects proposed for the plan of attack by some generals. She delivered, among the rest, hers with great warmth and decision; when she had finished she turned to Talleyrand, and said, ‘Why, you do not say a word! What do you think?’ He coldly replied, ‘C’est que je ne m’y entends nullement dans les affaires militaires.’ This bitter reproof vexed her to a degree of passion that she burst into tears; she merited the chastisement, for ‘qu’avait-elle à faire dans ce galère-là?’ An excellent pamphlet, called _Observations upon the Preface to the intercepted correspondence_, contains some witty and severe strictures upon Canning’s highly absurd arguments contained in said preface. It has been imputed to Grey, Lds. Wycombe, Holland, and to Tierney. Ld. H. admired it so much that his uncle Fitzpatrick said he could not resist telling him it was his, but it is a profound secret. Mr. Fox is employed in writing the history of some late period in the British annals, but whether King William’s reign or Charles II., I am not certain, but I rather believe the latter.[74] I sent him by his desire some books upon the subject, Ld. Grey’s narrative of the Rye House Plot, Baxter’s _Life_ of himself, and I have proposed to him various other miscellaneous tracts. A philosophical history from such a pen will be beyond praise, but I much fear his habitual indolence will interfere too much to allow a shadow of hope that he will finish a section even. Ld. H. has a quality in common with him that is very serviceable in many ways--a great enduring patience in listening to the arguments of any fool, however great, and of always doing his best to answer them; of never allowing himself to feel, ‘Why exert myself for this fellow?’ Fox says he always likes to hear the opinion of a fool, as he gets by it two opinions, that of the person who gave him the opinion, and his own as he adopts it. General Smith lost a great deal of money at Brookes’; to dissipate his chagrin he walked about the room, and at length joined in a conversation upon religion. ‘For my part,’ said he, ‘I cannot understand what they mean with their _Trinity_ and _Holy Ghost_.’ ‘I wonder at that,’ replied General Fitzpatrick, ‘as the symbol is a pigeon.’ [Sidenote: GENERAL FITZPATRICK]