[traes]

The very snippet you gave there is a counterexample to your argument. He defines miles in terms of feet (which is in turn defined by meters) allowing him to use commonly known conversion factors as a sanity check, while still keeping all values in meters. If he had used his already present definition of an inch as 0.0254 meters to define feet, he could have compounded this even further. The true answer is almost certainly that he simply did whatever came to mind first, and didn't think of defining feet in terms of inches because he hadn't defined inches yet.

[thsksbd]

I mean the legal definition of the inch is 25.4 mm. All other imperial length units are derived from the inch.

Furthermore, there are more than one definition of the inch. If he worked on astronomical data from the 19th century UK, all these units would have to be changed. By tying the foot to the inch he'd only have to redefine the inch to the old British inch.