— Let f∈A[X], a∈A, and let h be an integer ≥0. The following conditions are equivalent: (i) f is divisible by (X−α)h but not by (X−α)h−1; (ii) *there exists g∈A[X] such that f=(X−α)hg and g(a)=0. (i) ⇒ (ii) follows at once from Prop. 1. (ii) ⇒ (i) : Suppose that f=(X−α)hg, where g does not admit a as a root. Then f is divisible by (X−α)h; if g1∈A[X] existed such that f=(X−α)h+1g1, then since (X−α)n is not a divisor of zero in A[X] (IV, p. 9, Prop. 7), we have g=(X−a)g1 and so g(α)=0, which is absurd.
Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.