Nearly every play written by Shakespeare has been burlesqued, and whenever one of the London theatrical managers produces a grand revival of a Shakespearian tragedy, a travestie of it is almost immediately produced, at one, or another, of the smaller houses, which provide fun for the laughter-loving public. There are many worthy people who take offence at this, and fail to see that such fun is of a very harmless description, and that no disrespect is intended to the immortal bard, who was not, himself, above introducing burlesques of his contemporaries, even in his most serious works. This question was fully discussed in the London daily papers in August, 1883, _àpropos_ of burlesques of _The Tempest_, and _Hamlet_, produced by Mr. John Hollingshead, at the Gaiety Theatre. Some of the letters then published throw considerable light on what had been previously done in the way of Shakespearian burlesques, and are also of interest as summing up the arguments, for and against, Parody and Burlesque in general. Mr. Moy Thomas, the theatrical critic of the _Daily News_, thus introduced the subject in his weekly column, entitled―― THE THEATRES. “We have received the following letter on the subject of the impending burlesques of ‘The Tempest,’ and ‘Hamlet,’ at the Gaiety Theatre. We may remind our readers that we described the project as ‘somewhat startling,’ while we called attention to the facts that the productions in question are to be avowedly ‘elaborate parodies,’ and that there is reason to believe that ‘if this experiment should be found to be suited to the tastes of the town Mr. Burnand’s process of adapting Shakespeare to “nineteenth century audiences” may be expected to continue.’ More than this, in the way of protest, it did not in the present stage of the project seem to us necessary to say in a column which is mainly devoted to dramatic news.”