Here is a review from 1900 by the celebrated Dr Arndt.

A Dictionary of Materia Medica By John Henry Clarke, M.D. In three volumes. London: The Homeopathic Publishing Company, 12 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row, E.C., 1900. reviewed by H.R. Arndt, MD

When this work was first presented to the profession it received the customary attention in the pages of this journal; and while it is not in the power of the writer to refer to what he then said, the impression is very strong upon him that he had such appreciation of its merits as a somewhat cautious reader is likely to have of any extensive work bearing upon its pages ample evidence of intelligence and thoroughness in workmanship, to say nothing of the general and enviable reputation of the workman himself. That particular copy of Clarke’s Dictionary went up in smoke some time ago [when was it?], as did the JOURNAL in which the volumes were “noticed”; and the writer would probably not be called upon to speak again of the work had not another complete set found its way upon our empty and ravenously hungry bookshelves, through the thoughtful kindness of Dr. Clarke, expressed in a way which made the gift doubly welcome.

It is not in any sense intended to lessen, if that were possible, the obligation under which the writer finds himself, if our readers’ attention is once more called to the existence of this extensive and almost encyclopedic work on homeopathic materia medica. The real object in speaking of it ten years after the publication of the first volume is to bear testimony to the fact that the “Dictionary” stood the test of constant use for purposes of reference, and proved more and more valuable as familiarity with it grew by daily handling. No more positive proof of the writer’s estimate of the value of the “Dictionary” can be given than the fact that the first attempt after the fire to get together such books as seemed absolutely indispensable resulted in sending East an order for Allen’s “Handbook” and Clarke’s “Dictionary,” as the two works on materia medica without which he could not think of “keeping house,” and they have nobly filled the place of a rather extensive list of writers on this subject which in the olden times were at our service.

That the writer is not alone in the high estimate he places upon the work now under discussion is shown by the hearty endorsement given it at Atlantic City. Such endorsement is worth more in 1906 than it would have been in A.D. 1900. It facilitates ready analysis and comparison of the more than one thousand remedies considered in the materia medica. Its arrangement is simple and practical. The “clinical” section gives merely the remedies which clinically have proved of value in the treatment of certain morbid states. Special sections are devoted to “causation” and to “temperament,” covering that matter of special adaptability of certain remedies to “types,” “dispositions,” etc-., the importance of which as a consideration in the selection of the indicated remedy is well known to every experienced prescriber. A repertory of relationships (clinical and natural) gives in tabulated form complementary remedies, compatible and incompatible remedies, remedies which follow well and which the remedy under consideration follows well, remedy antidotes, and duration of action. Altogether it is a welcome aid in the study of remedies, for the sake of study alone or for prescribing.