行政機關於履行其行政任務之過程中，享有一定程度之裁量空間，俾便其因時、因地、因事制宜地有效發揮行政功能。然而，此等裁量權力並非意味著機關享有完全不受司法控制之評價權限，在一定之範圍內，針對行政機關行使裁量權限所作成之相關措施，仍存在著司法權力介入審查之可能性。在合法性與適當性之劃分當中，當事人不服機關行政裁量之措施，則其爭訟究竟應劃入何一領域？這直接影響著當事人針對裁量措施提起司法救濟之可能性，在法國戰前行政法學說理論中，嘗引起相當之爭執。其中，由M. Hauriou教授所提出之「行政道德性」理論所涉及之公共行政任務之討論，雖於戰後漸次失卻其影響力，然於戰前一度爲法國中央行政法院所採行。論述之過程中實足以引領吾人重新思考國家權力與行政機關存在之目的。本文雖以「戰前」爲題，然並非單純復古考據之作，所期待發生之效果，除介紹說明法國式行政裁量理論之特徵外，更寄望者，乃經由不同之思考模式，提供行政法學若干深入探究之基礎。

In the discharge of their missions, Government agencies are allowed to exercise discretionary power to a certain degree in reply to peculiar circumstances in any given case, such as the time, location, or nature of the case to boost efficiency. Such discretion, however, does not provide an absolute safe harbor for all agency actions, as part of which, under certain circumstances, are still subject to judicial scrutiny. The split of authority between the lawfulness and the appropriateness test as applied in complaint against improper exercise of discretion may affect one's redressability, prompting a heated debate in the pre-war era among French academia. Despite the legitimacy of professor M. Hauriou's theory on administrative morality, once upheld by the Conseil d'Etat in pre-war France, gradually eroded away in the postwar era, the principles thus enshrined may nevertheless provide insightful guidance on rethinking the correlation between state power and the existence of government agencies. The modifier ”before WWII” in the heading shall not be understood to qualify this note as a reservoir of antecedent documents from previous years; the purpose of this note, rather, is to provide a sketch of significant features on administrative discretion in French administration theory, and, from this comparative perspective, to seek further to invite more discussions in the development of a deeper appreciation of the administrative law.