Oral declarations of the deceased, as well as those reduced to writing may be given in evidence if otherwise competent. And such declarations may-consist of signs as well as words; and it makes no difference whether the same were made under oath or not under oath.100

93 Starr vs. Com., 97 Ky., 193;

1 Greenl. Ev., Sec. 156. 94 Westbrook vs. People, 126 111., 89; Collins vs. People, 194 El., 506. 95 Moeck vs. People, 100 111., 245;

People vs. Aiken, 66 Mich., 460; Howard vs. People, 185

111., 560. 96 Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 114. For illustrations of the competency and incompetency of the dying statements, see the cases cited in Hughes Cr. Law, Sees. 101 to 110, inclusive.

97 Westbrook vs. People, 126 111., 89.

98 Hughes Cr. Law, Sec. 117.

99 State vs. Elliott, 45 Iowa, 486.

Persons who were present and hoard the deceased make his dying statement are competent witnesses, and if they are unable to repeat the exact words they may state the substance of what the deceased said.101

If a written dying statement be made at one time and an oral one at another time covering different matters both may be submitted in evidence if otherwise competent.102

The fact that the declaration has been reduced to writing will not preclude evidence of oral declarations made on other occasions.103

A dying statement reduced to writing and signed by the deceased must be produced or its absence accounted for before oral evidence of such declarations can be admitted.104