If an XXXXX is defined as a set closed under certain operations, then any intersection of XXXXXs is another XXXXX. The proof is as follows. Suppose $\{A_\alpha : \alpha\in I\}$ is a set of XXXXXs and $u,v\in \bigcap\limits_{\alpha\in I}A_\alpha$. Then for every $\alpha\in I$, $u,v\in A_\alpha$. Performing the operations on $u,v$ under which every XXXXX is closed, we conclude that what we get is in $A_\alpha$. Since that's true of every value of $\alpha$, what we get is in $\bigcap\limits_{\alpha\in I}A_\alpha$. Therefore $\bigcap\limits_{\alpha\in I}A_\alpha$ is an XXXXX.
DO NOT take "$u,v$" to mean just two things; construe it if necessary as a countably infinite or even bigger class of things, if the operations under which every XXXXX is closed require that.
Now instead of "an XXXXX", just say "an XXXXX of which $\mathcal{C}$ is a subset", and apply that argument.
That's the answer to your first question. But if it's homework, it should be spelled out in more detail than what appears above.
Now what about "smallest"? Now we need the assumption that $\{A_\alpha : \alpha\in I\}$ is not just a collection of XXXXs containing $\mathcal{C}$ as a subset, but is the collection of all XXXXXs containing $\mathcal{C}$ as a subset.
It's the smallest simply because for every $\alpha_0$, $\displaystyle A_{\alpha_0}\supseteq \bigcap_{\alpha\in I}A_\alpha$. "Smallest" means simply that it's a subset of all others.