) When, as in this case, the alteration is established by inspection or is admitted, the burden of coming forward with evidence is on the party claiming the benefit of the lease as altered to show that the alteration was made under circumstances rendering it lawful. See Pappa v. Zatz (1950), 340 Ill. App. 642, 92 N.E.2d 494 (abstract); 2 Ill. L. Prac. Alteration of Instruments § 43 (1953). The above statement of the law supports plaintiff's view that the fact Russell was not defendants' agent and did not have their power of attorney was not dispositive of the question of whether the alterations in the lease were enforceable against defendants.