A claim ripped out of a piece on graphology on CNN:

The word graphology comes from the Greek meaning the theory of writing. The Roman historian Suetonius analyzed the script of the Emperor Augustus and wrote: "He does not separate his words, not carry over to the next line any excess letters -- this is the writing of a man whose mind is ruled by his heart."

Googling around a bit, the Internet Health Library makes a semi-analogous claim (which is repeated verbatim all over the internet):

As early as the 2nd century, the Roman historian Suetonius Tranquillus stated that the handwriting of Augustus Caesar was not separated sufficiently and that he was therefore mean.

A site called the Mystica claims (also repeated verbatim all over the internet):

Suetonius claimed that Emperor Augustus did not separate his words which led him to conclude that the Emperor did not pay attention to detail in forming a picture of the whole situation.

Then we get an excerpt from a book called A Practical Guide to Handwriting Analysis:

The next piece of documented historical evidence of graphology is from the year AD 120, when a Roman historian of the first twelve Caesars, Suetonius Tranquillus, distrusted the Emperor Augustus based on a sample of his writing. Tranquillus was quoted as saying: "He doesn't separate his words--I do not trust him."

What Suetonius actually wrote (v.A. 87-88 ... via the Latin Library) was:

Notavi et in chirographo eius illa praecipue: non dividit verba nec ab extrema parte versuum abundantis litteras in alterum transfert, sed ibidem statim subicit circumducitque. Orthographiam, id est formulam rationemque scribendi a grammaticis institutam, non adeo custodit ac videtur eorum potius sequi opinionem, qui perinde scribendum ac loquamur existiment. Nam quod saepe non litteras modo sed syllabas aut permutat aut praeterit, communis hominum error est. Nec ego id notarem, nisi mihi mirum videretur tradidisse aliquos, legato eum consulari successorem dedisse ut rudi et indocto, cuius manu "ixi" pro "ipsi" scriptum animadverterit. Quotiens autem per notas scribit, B pro A, C pro B ac deinceps eadem ratione sequentis litteras ponit; pro X autem duplex A.

Translation (via the Ancient History Sourcebook):

I have also observed this special peculiarity in his manner of writing: he does not divide words or carry superfluous letters from the end of one line to the beginning of the next, but writes them just below the rest of the word and draws a loop around them. He does not strictly comply with orthography, that is to say the theoretical rules of spelling laid down by the grammarians, seeming to be rather of the mind of those who believe that we should spell exactly as we pronounce. Of course his frequent transposition or omission of syllables as well as of letters are slips common to all mankind. I should not have noted this, did it not seem to me surprising that some have written that he cashiered a consular governor, as an uncultivated and ignorant fellow, because he observed that he had written izi for ipsi. Whenever he wrote in cipher, he wrote B for A, C for B, and the rest of the letters on the same principle, using AA for X.

No comment about economics/meanness ... no comment about trustworthiness ... insert disparaging comment of your choice about graphology/graphologists here.