The movie starts off with an illustration of injustice as what many call justice but is just the vengeance of a lynch mob.

The protagonist, Jed Cooper, is a former “lawman” turned rancher in the Oklahoma Territory who unknowingly bought stolen cattle. A mob of locals rides up and attempts to lynch him. But he doesn’t die. He’s left hanging there until a traveling marshal cuts him down. He doesn’t pass judgment on Jed, but simply adds him to his wagon of outlaws that he’s taking back to Fort Grant, where the judge will hear their case and decide their fate.

After a brief stay in the county jail (aka dungeon), they exonerated and released Jed. But Judge Fenton has a curious proposal. He has jurisdiction over a vast territory with only a fraction of the lawmen needed to maintain peace. As a result, his form of justice is swift and firm, usually ends in a hanging. But he recruits Jed to be one of his marshals.

All Jed wants is vengeance against the men who tried to hang him. However, the judge persuades him that serving justice is more satisfying. If Jed captures them, the judge will try them and hang them for their crime.

The film introduces another character at Fort Grant who is seeing justice, Rachel Warren. Every time one marshal brings in a wagon of men for the judge, she goes out and looks at each of their faces. Toward the end of the film, we discover that a group of men murdered her husband and attacked her. She made a deal with the judge to help identify the guilty parties before the judge hanged them for their crimes.

The film brings out different aspects of justice, providing the audience with a more nuanced view of the word. To most on the Western Frontier, in the absence of a strong police presence, a code developed, which the rightful law agencies honored. Most famously is the code of self-defense. Even though American law includes this, western films at least simplify it: whoever draws first is guilty, and killing him before he kills you is a pure act of self-defense. In Western films, this principle seems to be taken further to mean that killing to right an injustice done to you is acceptable. The film brings this into question from the beginning with the clear injustice of the lynch mob. Later, the judge reinforces this by ordering Jed to bring the men back for a trial.

The film tried to make clear the difference between self-defense and vengeance. When Jed encounters some men who tried to lynch him, he kills one in self-defense. AKA the original definition—he draws his gun and fires only after being fired upon or to prevent a criminal from escaping. These seem to be the only conditions that are legal, though the judge isn’t happy about how it played out.

Another aspect of justice that the film addresses is the degree to which the punishment should fit the crime. Jed captures three men accused of rustling. Only one was guilty of killing the original owners while the other two, boys between the ages of 16-18, simply went along with the scheme. The judge sentences all three to hanging. This doesn’t sit well with Jed. While they traveled back to Fort Grand, the man who kill the cattle owners tries to escape, but the two boys do not. In fact, they cooperate the whole way. The murdering rustler at one point even begs for Jed to kill him as he tries to escape. Jed would probably have been seen as justified. However, he chooses to tie the man to spare him.

Jed becomes famous for his capture of these men and ability to return them all to town despite being two days late to return, dehydrated, and exhausted (falling from his saddle the moment he reaches town). Because of his fame, the judge refuses Jed’s plea to be lenient with the two boys. “Because of that magnificent journey you took to bring three killers to justice,” the Judge is determined to make an example out of both the rustlers and Jed’s heroism. The judge fears that if he shows any leniency, the territory would devolve into anarchy and men would say, “There is no justice in Fort Grant… [and] no statehood for this territory.” He points out that lynching and hanging were the same thing. The judge clarifies that they are not just hanged, they are “judged.” For him, that is the difference between a lynch mob and the state-sanctioned gallows. The hangings are a public spectacle and even include the selling of “cold beer” to the onlookers. This offends Jed’s sense of justice and sends him into a depressant spiral.

The sheriff at Red Creek, where the lynch mob (led by a man named Captain Wilson) hails from, comes to Fort Grant to try to make peace with Jed. He offers him the money the lynch mob stole from him to make them even. Jed agrees that “money-wise” they are even. When the men hear this from the Sharrif, they realize their mistake in not finishing the job. From here, they plan how to find Jed and kill him before he kills or arrests them. The cowardly Shariff chooses to ignore this fact. Two others, Charlie Blackfoot and Maddow, abandon the captain and choose to flee. Tommy and Loomis remain, setting the stage for a showdown.

The men attack during the hanging, and Jed is injured in their attack, but once again survives. He purposes to go after them himself, implying he still wants vengeance, not justice yet.

At this point in the film, Rachel Warren nurses him back to health and shares with him her story. Her heroism in continuing in the face of grave injustice seems to mellow his anger.

In the next scene, she says she is done looking for the men who hurt her and asks him if he has stopped too. But he admits that he’s “not looking for ghosts.” He knows where the men who tried to kill him are and still intends to go after them. “The end of my trail’s in Red Creek.” Revenge still motivates him. He goes after the men. There’s a rather suspenseful shootout at night where Jed picks off the men one at a time. The killings appear justified. He warns him to drop his weapon, then kills three of them (except the captain, who hangs himself) and lets three others live. He even seems to forgive one of them. Then he goes to turn in his badge, hang up his guns, and marry Rachel. He seems at this point to have healed some of the hate inside.

The judge, too, is trying to heal from some past wrong, though I don’t believe the film tells us what it is. He self-diagnoses his actions as using the men he hangs as “kindling for his fire of justice,” but goes back to the old excuse that he is the only source of law in a lawless territory. Once again asks Jed to join his crusade to “turn this godforsaken territory into a state where no one man calls himself the law.” Jed agrees if the judge will pardon “old man” Jenkins. The Judge agrees, and Jed takes back up the badge.

It’s clear the two are on a mission, one neither seems to really want, but feel obligated to carry out.

The film ends unsatisfactorily. If Jed had a positive arc, he would have given up his quest for vengeance and married Rachel. But he has a tragic end instead. He carries out his vengeance (at least in part) and, as penance, he sacrifices his own future for the dream of future statehood and the order and justice it brings.