Why losing a cannon did not necessarily condemn a captain

What happened to a captain who lost one of the ship's cannon?

It depended on the circumstances; jettisoning cannon to save a ship in a storm was accepted because the ship was much harder to replace.

The circumstances determined how the loss of a cannon was judged. Guns were sometimes thrown overboard in storms to lighten or stabilize a ship, and doing so could be sound seamanship rather than negligence. Iron artillery could be replaced more readily than a wooden hull built from mature oak. A ship and its people therefore took priority over preserving every weapon. Cannon landed for a siege and lost with a failed fort attack would likewise be treated as an ordinary risk of war. Naval accountability depended on operational judgment rather than the simple loss of government property.