" (Among the cases cited are the Connecticut cases of Coyne v. Plume, 90 Conn. 293, 300, and Artman v. Artman, 111 Conn. 124, 130.) Reference is also made to the discussion by Judge O'Sullivan in Sattler v. Sattler, 7 Conn. Sup. 179, 180-181. A statement appearing in Smith v. Smith, 150 Conn. 15, 18, relied upon by the defendant, in which our Supreme Court, speaking through Justice King, assumes without deciding that the statutory action for legal separation (§ 46-29), unlike one for divorce, is an action requiring in personam jurisdiction is viewed as dictum as applied to the case at bar.