He represented Russia at the Hague Peace Conferences (during which he drafted the Martens Clause) and helped to settle the first cases of international arbitration, notably the dispute between France and the United Kingdom over Newfoundland.

Born to ethnic Estonian[2][3][4][5][6] parents at Pärnu in the Governorate of Livonia of Russian Empire, Martens was later raised and educated as a German-speaker.

[7] His book on The Right of Private Property in War had appeared in 1869, and had been followed in 1873 by that upon The Office of Consul and Consular Jurisdiction in the East, which had been translated into German and republished at Berlin.

These were the first of a long series of studies which won for their author a worldwide reputation, and raised the character of the Russian school of international jurisprudence in all civilised countries.

[7] First amongst them must be placed the great Recueil des traités et conventions conclus par la Russie avec les puissances etrangeres (13 volumes, 1874–1902).

More openly biased in character are such treatises as: In the delicate questions raised in some of these works Martens stated his case with learning and ability, even when it was obvious that he was arguing as a special pleader.

He played an important part in the negotiations between his own country and Japan, which led to the peace of Portsmouth (August 1905) and prepared the way for the Russo-Japanese convention.

In April 1907, he addressed a remarkable letter to The Times on the position of the second Duma, in which he argued that the best remedy for the ills of Russia would be the dissolution of that assembly and the election of another on a narrower franchise.

In 1952, the German émigré scholar in the US, Arthur Nussbaum, himself the author of a well-received history of the law of nations, published an article on Martens, which still "makes waves".

First, he turned his attention to Martens' celebrated two-volume textbook and pointed out several pro-Russian gaps and biases in its historical part: "Flagrant lack of objectivity and conscientiousness.

The Tsars and Tsarinas invariably appear as pure representatives of peace, conciliation, moderation and justice, whereas the moral qualities of their non-Russian opponents leave much to be desired."