Covenants are subject to the same rules as other contracts in regard to the qualifica- tions of parties, the assent required, and the nature of the purpose for which the contract is entered into. See PARTIES; CONTRACTS. No pecular words are needed to raise an express covenant; 12 Ired. 145; 1 C. & M. 357, 5 Q. B. 683; 3 Ex. 237, per Parke, B.; and by statute in Alabama, Arkansas, Del- aware, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Mis- souri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Texas, the words grant, bargain, and sell, in conveyances in fee, unless specially restricted, amount to cove nants that the grantor was seized in fee, freed from incumbrances done or suffered by him, and for quiet enjoyment against his acts; 4 Kent 473; 2 Binn. 95; 23 Mo. 151, 174; 17 Ala. N. S. 198; 1 Sm. & M. 611; 19 Ill. 235; 15 Ark. 289; but do not imply any general warranty of title in Alabama, Ar- kansas, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina; 4 Kent 474; 22 Ark. 72; 1 Murph. 343;2 Ala. N. S. 535. In Iowa, by the statute of 1843, the same rule was authorized, and up- on this it was held that all covenants were express; 2 Green 525; but no such pro- visions are to be found in the revised code of 1884. In Ohio the statute of 1795 was almost exactly copied from the Pennsyl- vaniastatute, but wasrepealed in 1824 and re- enacted in substance, and entirely repealed in 1831, and the latest Revised Statutes (1884), like those of Iowa, are silent on the subject. The Wisconsin statute, providing that no covenant shall be implied, makes an excep- tion in the case of the short form of convey-