While a transaction is actually in progress the declarations or statements of any or all persons present are competent as part of the res gestae. For example, at the time of a robbery the defendants ran out of the place where the offense was committed, and the person who had been robbed by them came following immediately in pursuit, holloing that he had been robbed, and asking, which way did those fellows go? What was thus said is competent evidence as part of the res gestae.29

Res gestae means the surrounding facts of a transaction,30 and includes anything said or done not only by the persons actually engaged in it, but also anything said or done by any others who were present.

Declarations of third persons acting with the defendant at the time of the difficulty are competent.31 And although, generally speaking, declarations or statements must be contemporaneous with the event or transaction, yet when there are connecting circumstances, they may, even if made sometime afterward, form part of the res gestae.32 And if the prosecution introduces part of what was said at the time of the act, the accused is entitled to introduce the remainder.33 But statements of third persons cannot be shown in evidence unless they were part of the res gestae.34

It follows from what has been said that any declarations or statements of third persons made some time after a transaction is over are incompetent, being mere hearsay.35

29 Bow vs. People, 160 Ill, 440;

Lander vs. People, 104 Ill., 256;

Healey vs. People, 163 Ill., 380;

Com. vs. Wemtz, 161 Pa. St., 591. 30 Carr vs. State, 43 Ark., 95. 31 Lyons vs. People, 137 Ill., 461;

Underbill's Cr. Ev., Sec. 331.

32 State vs. Davis, 104 Tenn., 501;

Com. vs. Werntz, 161 Pa. St., 591; Simons vs. People, 150

Ill., 75. 33 Burns vs. People, 49 Ala., 370;

Miller vs. People, 216 Ill., 309, 312. 34 Carlton vs. People, 150 Ill., 181;

Thomas vs. People, 67 N. Y., 218.