
    State of Connecticut against Samuel Lockwood.
   ON information for perjury—It was stated to the Court that the prosecution originated from a controversy between the informant and accused.—The Court said that this kind of prosecution was frequently made an enjine of personal malice, and the public in consequence faddled with large bills of cost.—That the attorney ought to be cautious in taking up these matters except in flagrant instances; but leave them to be prosecuted by the party injured.—

The state attorney entered a nolle prosequi.  