"LOL. Please supply evidence for this fancy."
Actually, he was a plagiarist per the author of "Krakatoa". A man named Wallace came up with "survival of the fittest" and his contemporary, Charles Darwin, was happy to claim that he came up with it. In that sense, Darwin was not so "devout". Theft is theft and Christ would not approve.
And some people might call your claim "slander". Since Wallace was off in the jungles of Borneo or somesuch place in the S. Pacific when his manuscript reached Darwin, Darwin could have simply thrown it in the fireplace, rushed his theory (which he had already been working on for years) into print, and later claimed that Wallace's manuscript never got to him.
Instead, he did the honorable thing, and saw to it that both his theory and Wallace's theory were read together, in public.
“The names of Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) and Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913) have long been joined with the modern concept of "evolution" and the theory of "natural selection." The story of the interrelationship between the two men over their professional careers is one of gentlemanly strain: Darwin, the country squire, living off inherited wealth and sound investments on a small estate working leisurely in the pursuit of evolution, and Wallace, the committed socialist, saved ultimately from abject poverty by Darwin and his friends who arranged a Crown pension, laboring seemingly forever in other's shadow. Their coming together was itself a random event that neither anticipated. Darwin, the procrastinator at least on this subject, was forced into action only when he saw his own ideas-formed over some twenty years-expressed in a letter written by Wallace in a span of a few days. So sudden did this happen, and so similar were many of Wallace's concepts that the gentleman in Darwin felt it was imperative that Wallace's letter be published. Only through actions of his friends, the geologist Charles Lyell (1797-1875) and the botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker (1817-1911), was it possible for Darwin's long efforts to be acknowledged jointly with those of Wallace. The paper that is made available here is the result of that forced union. ...The lack of any immediate objections to the paper was satisfying to Darwin. The events leading up to the presentation, and the reaction, were reported to Wallace who, in turned, sent back his belated approval of how things were handled; his letter reached Darwin in January of 1859. ...”